West Plains Transit Center
West Plains Transit Center Interchange Justification Report FINAL
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
WSDOT HQ Development Services & Access Manager Concurrence By: ________________________________________, P.E. Barb De Ste. Croix – Development Services & Access Manager
Date: ______________________________________, 2015
WSDOT Approval By: ________________________________________, P.E. Scott Zeller – Assistant State Design Engineer
Date: ______________________________________, 2015
FHWA Approval By: ________________________________________ Don Petersen – FHWA Safety & Design Engineer
Date: ______________________________________, 2015
Final | Interchange Justification Report
Table of Contents Charter Agreement ................................................................................................................................................................ CA - 1 Methods and Assumptions ................................................................................................................................................. M&A - 1 Technical Committee Acceptance ............................................................................................................................... M&A - 1 Introduction and Project Description ............................................................................................................................ M&A - 2 Analysis Years/Periods................................................................................................................................................ M&A - 4 Project and Study Areas .............................................................................................................................................. M&A - 4 Traffic Operations Analysis.......................................................................................................................................... M&A - 4 Travel Forecast ........................................................................................................................................................... M&A - 5 Safety Issues ............................................................................................................................................................... M&A - 5 Selection of Measures of Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................... M&A - 5 Deviations/Justifications .............................................................................................................................................. M&A - 5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................... M&A - 6 Purpose and Need ............................................................................................................................................................... P&N - 1 Project Description ....................................................................................................................................................... P&N - 1 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................................................ P&N - 1 Need (Problem Definition) ............................................................................................................................................ P&N - 1 Goals and Objectives ................................................................................................................................................... P&N - 2 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... P&N - 2 Policy Point 1: Need for the Access Point Revision ............................................................................................................. PP1 - 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... PP1 - 1 Existing and Future Needs ........................................................................................................................................... PP1 - 4 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... PP1 - 7 Policy Point 2: Reasonable Alternatives .............................................................................................................................. PP2 - 1 Transportation System Management ........................................................................................................................... PP2 - 1 Improvement Alternatives ............................................................................................................................................. PP2 - 1 Future WSDOT Improvements ..................................................................................................................................... PP2 - 2 Policy Point 3: Operational and Collision Analysis............................................................................................................... PP3 - 1 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... PP3 - 1
TOC - 1
Traffic Operational Analysis – Base Conditions............................................................................................................ PP3 - 2 Traffic Operational Analysis – Build Alternatives .......................................................................................................... PP3 - 7 Collision Analysis – Base Conditions ......................................................................................................................... PP3 - 13 Collision Analysis – Build Alternatives ........................................................................................................................ PP3 - 15 Policy Point 4: Access Connections and Design ................................................................................................................. PP4 - 1 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... PP4 - 1 Conceptual Layout and Signing Plans .......................................................................................................................... PP4 - 1 Present and Future Interchange Spacing ..................................................................................................................... PP4 - 1 Policy Point 5: Land Use and Transportation Plans............................................................................................................. PP5 - 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... PP5 - 1 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... PP5 - 2 Policy Point 6: Future Interchanges ..................................................................................................................................... PP6 - 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... PP6 - 1 Future WSDOT Improvements ..................................................................................................................................... PP6 - 1 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... PP6 - 1 Policy Point 7: Coordination................................................................................................................................................. PP7 - 1 Funding ........................................................................................................................................................................ PP7 - 1 Project Coordination ..................................................................................................................................................... PP7 - 1 Policy Point 8: Environmental Process ................................................................................................................................ PP8 - 1 Environmental Approval and Permitting Process ......................................................................................................... PP8 - 1
Appendices Appendix Policy Point 1 – A: Horizon 2040 Short-Term Regionally Significant Projects 2014 – 2040 Appendix Policy Point 3 – A: Base Conditions Traffic Volumes Appendix Policy Point 4 – A: Alternative Review and Selection Technical Memorandum Appendix Policy Point 4 – B: Preferred Alternative Plan Sheets
TOC - 2
Final | Interchange Justification Report
DRAFT
2. Introduction and Project Description The Spokane Transit Authority (STA) West Plains Transit Center project is located near Exit 272 along I-90 in the West Plains area of Spokane County. For the purposes of this report, the West Plains area is generally defined as the area west of the City of Spokane at Exit 277B (Hwy 2) which includes the cities of Airway Heights, Medical Lake, Cheney and the Four Lakes community and the areas served by those cities, as well as Fairchild Air Force Base and Spokane International Airport. See Figure 1. The transit center will be an important element of the future High Performance Transit (HPT) Network providing service throughout the West Plains. In early 2012, conceptual studies for the West Plains Transit Center were started. As a result of these studies, preliminary concepts and construction cost opinions were developed. After meeting with local agencies, these concepts and cost opinions were updated in March, 2013. Under the current conceptual design, the West Plains Transit Center will feature three passenger loading platforms and a park and ride lot with at least 100 parking stalls. The main loading platform will feature at least three bus bays to accommodate current and future service growth. Another loading platform will be adjacent to the eastbound off-ramp and accommodate mainline transit service along I-90. The remaining loading platform will serve westbound buses along I-90 and be connected to the rest of the transit center by a pedestrian bridge. Other features will include a transit-only flyer stop, transit lanes as needed, landscaping, lighting, bicycle parking, passenger shelters, and intelligent transportation systems (ITS). Architectural treatments and design features will also be incorporated into the project.
Purpose of the Project The purpose of the West Plains Transit Center is to expand connectivity to the West Plains communities and improve travel times to and from the City of Cheney and Eastern Washington University by providing improved high quality, higher performance and cost effective transit services that will address mobility needs for an expanding population and employment base west of Spokane. Multi-modal transportation services will be enhanced through: • • • •
Improving connectivity between cities and to the West Plains area; Providing easy and fast connections to HPT service along the I-90 corridor; Improving transit access to residential and employment areas adjacent to Exit 272 by providing convenient transfers between local and express bus services; and Reducing congestion by providing an attractive alternative for single occupant vehicle (SOV) users.
As part of this project, an Interchange Justification Report (IJR) will be completed to determine the preferred solution for the West Plains Transit Center project, in cooperation with FHWA, WSDOT, SRTC, Spokane County, and the Spokane International Airport. The results of the IJR will enable the project stakeholders to assess options and opportunities to improve the transportation system within the project area.
Project Leads and Proponents • • • • • • •
Spokane Transit Authority Federal Transit Administration Federal Highway Administration Washington State Department of Transportation Spokane Regional Transportation Council Spokane County Spokane International Airport
Environmental Document Types At this time, we anticipate a NEPA Documented Categorical Exclusion (and SEPA Checklist).
CA-3
Level of Documentation The proposed improvement options will include revisions to the existing eastbound off-ramp configuration, a center median westbound bus-only flyer stop or a westbound north side flyer stop with changes to the existing westbound on-ramp configuration. As required by WSDOT and FHWA, eight specific policy points will be addressed in the IJR. These are: •
Policy Point 1 documents the need for the access point revision. STA is embarking on a process of improving multimodal transportation services and developing a HPT Network. Policy Point 1 will document the need for access revisions in order to achieve the desired transit level of service to achieve that purpose.
•
Policy Point 2 provides a discussion of the reasonable alternatives evaluated. Building on previously completed studies, they will include: o
The do-nothing alternative which will include providing all transit service at the park and ride lot;
o
A center median option; and
o
A north side lane option.
•
Policy Point 3 includes the Operational & Collision Analysis. For this IJR, the only change in traffic is bus access at the Medical Lake Interchange with no changes at the upstream and downstream interchanges. As a result, this analysis will focus on either the weave or merge operations along I-90 and bus movements through the ramp terminals at the Medical Lake Interchange; depending on the preferred alternative.
•
Policy Point 4 discusses access connections and design. This policy point will include evaluation of limited improvements for bus only access to a transit stop along the main line, connected to a park and ride lot via a pedestrian bridge. Local street access will not be changed as part of this project; although there will be a “forward compatibility” analysis with WSDOT plans for future interchange improvements (at this time these appear to be limited to roundabouts at the ramp terminals).
•
Policy Point 5 addresses compatibility with land use and transportation plans.
•
Policy Point 6 reviews compatibility with the comprehensive transportation network plan and anticipated new access points.
•
Policy Point 7 deals with coordinating projects and actions programmed for funding.
•
Policy Point 8 includes a brief summary of the environmental process.
3. Core Stakeholder Group The Core Stakeholder Group is composed of representatives from the Spokane Transit Authority, Spokane County, City of Cheney, the Spokane International Airport, WSDOT, FHWA, West Plains Chamber of Commerce, and the Spokane Regional Transportation Council. The Core Stakeholder Group is an advisory group and will provide interagency oversight during the design phase of the West Plains Transit Center project. The Core Stakeholder Group will: •
Meet periodically for project briefings.
•
Serve as a sounding board for management of emerging issues and opportunities.
•
Provide overall policy input and insight regarding issues affecting the project.
•
Identify opportunities for partnerships between WSDOT and local, state, tribal and federal jurisdictions that result in an improved project.
•
Assist in conflict resolution within the Technical Committee, if needed.
•
Review preferred alternatives identified by project team members with input from the Technical Committee.
•
Confirm recommendations for priority project implementation following preparation of IJR.
CA-4
FINAL | hwlochner.com
DRAFT
Core Stakeholder Group Goal Provide executive level support for the project and identified solutions. Foster community support through communication of project goals, progress and ultimately identified solutions with fellow elected officials, agency administration representatives, and the public.
Core Stakeholder Group Roles & Responsibilities •
Each agency may provide one primary and one or more alternate representative(s) to the committee. If a primary participant is not able to attend a committee meeting, a fully briefed alternate will take her/his place.
•
All committee members will help identify project risks and assist in identifying strategies for addressing project risks.
•
Inform the WSDOT, Spokane Transit Authority and consultant project team regarding strategic partnership opportunities as they emerge.
•
Review project deliverables and/or project summary information when requested to do so. These reviews will focus on understanding the options that have been considered by the Technical Committee and the context behind selection of the preferred alternatives.
Primary Core Stakeholder Group Member / Alternate Al French / ______________________________ Tom Trulove / ____________________________ Larry Krauter / Matt Breen Kathleen Schreiber / _______________________ Don Petersen / ____________________________ Scott Zeller / ______________________________ Keith Metcalf / Mike Frucci Kevin Wallace / ____________________________ John Witmer / ____________________________ Steve Saxton / ____________________________ E. Susan Meyer / ___________________________
Affiliation/Agency Spokane County City of Cheney Spokane International Airport West Plains Chamber of Commerce FHWA WSDOT – Olympia Headquarters WSDOT – Eastern Region Spokane Regional Transportation Council FTA FTA Spokane Transit Authority
4. Technical Committee The Technical Committee is composed of technical staff from the Spokane Transit Authority, Spokane County, the Spokane Regional Transportation Council, WSDOT, FHWA, and the Spokane International Airport. From time to time additional agencies may assist or participate with the team on an as-needed basis. The Technical Committee will provide an interagency advisory role during the West Plains Transit Center IJR process. The Technical Committee will: •
Review and help refine the draft purpose and need statement for the project.
•
Assist in identification of design options consistent with the project’s purpose and need.
•
Help review design options and provide input into which options fit best with the local context.
•
Assist in identification of mitigation measures to reduce adverse project effects, and identify mitigation measures that are locally preferred.
•
Assist in the review of relevant project discipline reports and provide timely feedback on such.
•
Identify opportunities for partnerships between WSDOT, local, state, tribal and federal jurisdictions that result in an improved project. CA-5
Technical Committee Goal: Foster excellent project design by proactively involving affected stakeholders and jurisdictions. By bringing together individuals from different agencies early in the project, stakeholders expect to work collaboratively to address member organization concerns, and move quickly through the alternatives analysis, IJR, and NEPA/SEPA documentation process.
Technical Committee Roles & Responsibilities •
Participating agencies may provide multiple participants on the Technical Committee. Each agency may provide one primary and one or more alternate representative(s) to the team. If a primary participant is not able to attend a Technical Committee meeting, a fully briefed alternate will take her/his place.
•
All team members will work proactively to identify project risks and assist in identifying management strategies for project risks.
•
Inform the WSDOT, the Spokane Transit Authority and consultant project team regarding strategic partnership opportunities as they emerge.
•
Conduct reviews of project designs and documentation when requested to do so. These reviews will focus on identifying issues early with an emphasis on identifying design challenges.
•
Team members agree to work to resolve issues quickly and cost effectively.
•
Team members will actively inform and seek guidance from decision makers at their respective agency.
Primary Technical Committee Member / Alternate
Affiliation
Roy Siegel / _________________________________________
FHWA
Mike Frucci / Glenn Wagemann
WSDOT – Eastern Region
Glenn Wagemann (alternate) / __________________________
WSDOT – Eastern Region
Barb De Ste Croix / ___________________________________
WSDOT – Olympia Headquarters
Ryan Stewart / _______________________________________
Spokane Regional Transportation Council
Barry Greene / _______________________________________
Spokane County
Lisa Corcoran/_______________________________________
Spokane International Airport
Karl Otterstrom / _____________________________________
Spokane Transit Authority
Don Skillingstad / _____________________________________
Spokane Transit Authority
Technical Committee Operating Guidelines The Technical Committee will follow these guidelines to promote effective meetings and efficient completion of project tasks: •
All team members will participate fully, will have the authority to represent their organization, and will keep their respective organization leaders informed of project progress.
•
All team members will review pertinent project materials on a timely basis and provide timely feedback.
•
Members will come to meetings prepared to discuss items on the agenda.
•
Team members will honor one another by communicating honestly and respectfully. Members will give everyone an opportunity to speak.
•
Team members will keep their role and agency mission in mind when discussing project issues.
CA-6
FINAL | hwlochner.com
DRAFT •
Team members will resolve issues within their power to solve and re-direct those issues that cannot be solved in a timely manner. If issue resolution is necessary, team members will strive to follow the conflict resolution process identified in this Charter.
•
Meetings will begin and end at the scheduled times. Participants that arrive late will catch up on what was missed during breaks or as other opportunities allow.
•
Technical sub-groups may be formed to work on specialty issues specific to particular project aspects or of particular importance to specific areas/agencies.
•
The project team depends on consistent parameters for project design. Once project decisions are made the Technical Committee will work to honor those decisions and avoid reopening issues that have already been resolved or decided. Such decisions will be documented by the consultant team in technical memoranda and distributed to the group.
5. Project Participants/Alternates If a Core Stakeholder Group or Technical Committee member can no longer participate in the project, they will recommend a replacement to the Spokane Transit Authority. The departing member will fully brief their replacement prior to the replacement’s first meeting.
6. Schedule and Key Milestones See Attachment A
7. Key Meeting Dates See Attachment B
8. Decision Making Throughout the project there will be points at which decisions need to be made. WSDOT, the Spokane Transit Authority and the consultant team will strive to communicate with the Core Stakeholder Group and Technical Committee regarding which decisions are within each Committee’s realm and which decisions will be made by the WSDOT and Spokane Transit Authority with input from each Committee Member.
Decision Making Styles Autocratic: At times WSDOT and Spokane Transit Authority (as lead agency), will make decisions and report those to the Core Stakeholder Group and Technical Committee. Group: The project manager will bring issues to the group for discussion and analysis at Committee meetings. WSDOT and the Spokane Transit Authority, with Consultant Team assistance, will make these decisions based on input from the Technical Committee and/or Core Stakeholder Group. FHWA: As a federal facility, FHWA reserves the right to overrule decisions made at the local level.
9. Conflict Identification & Resolution The Core Stakeholder Group and Technical Committee members will work to resolve conflicts respectfully and when making group decisions will strive for consensus. If consensus cannot be achieved and conflict results, the involved parties will meet together, separate from the group to resolve the conflict on their own. If consensus still cannot be reached, WSDOT, the Spokane Transit Authority and the consultant team have the authority to choose the solution most consistent with the project goals. CA-7
10. Late in Process Changes In the course of any project, ideas may be put forth that are contrary to or different from previously agreed upon decisions but which may nonetheless, result in a significant improvement to the final outcome of this IJR. In those cases, depending on at what level the idea originates, the Technical Committee or Core Stakeholder Group will evaluate the idea and evaluate the benefits of the idea against impacts to: •
Scope, schedule and cost of the IJR, including resolution of who will pay for additional impacts if any;
•
Scope, schedule and cost of the preferred alternative; and
•
Indirect impacts, such as delays to other project schedules that directly relate to the outcome of this process.
When a change is suggested, there may be a three-level decision making process, depending on the relative impact of the suggested change, as follows: 1. In consultation with the Consultant’s Project Manager, Karl Otterstrom, Don Skillingstad, Mike Frucci and Roy Siegel will meet to determine if the merits of the potential change outweigh the associated impacts to scope, schedule and/or budget (all three agencies must be represented in person or by telephone for a determination to be rendered); 2. If it is agreed the potential change has merit, necessary additional evaluations will be completed and submitted to the Technical Committee for consideration (if an idea is not determined to have sufficient merit, the reason for the determination will be reported to the Technical Committee); and 3. The Core Stakeholder Group will be the ultimate arbiter concerning whether or not a late in process change/idea is carried forth if a decision cannot be made at the Technical Committee level.
11. Success Measures To be defined by group. Some possible items include: •
Approved IJR and Environmental Document
•
Meet project schedule and budget
•
Priority projects positioned for funding
12. Risk Assessment To be defined by group. Some possible items include: •
Changes in project team or stakeholder membership
•
Schedule
•
Changes to key decisions
•
Revisiting previously agreed upon issues, topics or policies
•
Policy changes
•
Design approval
CA-8
FINAL | hwlochner.com
DRAFT
13. Project Communication Internal: Karl Otterstrom, Director of Planning, Spokane Transit Authority; Don Skillingstad, Capital Projects Manager, Spokane Transit Authority; Mike Frucci, WSDOT Project Manager; and Steve Lewis, consultant team Project Manager will be the primary source of communication to the Core Stakeholder Group and Technical Committee. Project information will be provided to participants via email and an internal team website prepared and hosted by the Spokane Transit Authority, on which project related data, reports, graphics and other information will be posted as it becomes available. Lochner will provide meeting agendas, meeting materials, and will prepare meeting notes following each meeting. External: Media inquiries will be routed through Karl Otterstrom and Don Skillingstad, Spokane Transit Authority. WSDOT or Spokane Transit Authority may host a project website on which information will be posted as it is available and ready for public review.
CA-9
City of Airway Heights Fairchild Air Force Base
90
§ ¨ ¦
Spokane International Airport
City of Spokane
_ ^ City of Medical Lake
Proposed West Plains Transit Center
90
§ ¨ ¦
µ
0
2.5
5
City of Cheney
10 Miles
West Plains Area Figure 1
Attachment A West Plains Transit Center Project Schedule
Task # Task 1 Stakeholder Coordination 1.2 Core Stakeholder Meetings 1.2 Technical Committee Meetings 1.2 STA Board Meeting/Presentation 2 2.1 2.1.9 2.1.9 2.1.9
Interchange Justification Report Draft IJR Report Preparation Final IJR Report Engineering Acceptance of IJR Report Approval of IJR
3 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7.7
Environmental Review NEPA - Right of Way NEPA - Geotech/Environmental NEPA - Project SEPA
3.5
Right of Way Acquisition
4 4.1 4.2 4.3
PS&E Design Documents 30% Design Documents 60% Design Documents 90% Design Documents
Jul
2014 Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan
2015 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan
2016 Feb Mar
November 19, 2014
ATTACHMENT B 2014
2015
AGENCY COORDINATION A
S
O
N
D
J
F
M
A
M
Core Stakeholder Group Meetings Kick-Off Meeting
7th
Meeting 1
6th
Meeting 2
11th
Meeting 3
20th Technical Stakeholder Committee
Kick-Off Meeting Meeting 1 Meeting 2 Meeting 3 Meeting 4
7th 11th 2nd 6th 8th
Meeting 5 Meeting 6 Agency Coordination meeting dates are subject to change. An announcement with agenda will be sent 2-weeks prior to meeting date.
12th 24th
J
Introduction and Project Description The Spokane Transit Authority (STA) West Plains Transit Center project is located near Exit 272 along I-90 in the West Plains area of Spokane County. The transit center will be an important element of the future High Performance Transit Network (HPT) providing service throughout the West Plains. In early 2012, conceptual studies for the West Plains Transit Center were started. As a result of these studies, preliminary concepts and construction cost opinions were developed. After meeting with local agencies, these concepts and cost opinions were updated in March, 2013. Under the current conceptual design, the West Plains Transit Center will feature three passenger loading platforms and one park and ride lot with at least 100 parking stalls. The main loading platform will feature at least three bus bays to accommodate current and future service growth. Another loading platform will be adjacent to the eastbound off-ramp and accommodate mainline transit service along I-90. The remaining loading platform will serve westbound buses along I-90 and be connected to the rest of the transit center by a pedestrian bridge. Other features will include a transit-only flyer stop, transit lanes as needed, landscaping, lighting, bicycle parking, passenger shelters, and intelligent transportation systems (ITS). Architectural treatments and design features will also be incorporated into the project. This interchange justification report (IJR) will evaluate the base conditions and the proposed build alternatives as recommended by the Technical Committee and approved by the Core Stakeholder Group and STA Board for the opening year and design year periods. These build alternatives may include the following three options: 1. Express buses using the existing street systems to access the transit center. 2. Express buses using a new westbound median flyer stop and a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound lanes to the westbound median flyer stop. 3. Express buses using a new westbound flyer stop adjacent to the westbound on-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound and westbound lanes to the westbound flyer stop.
Purpose of the Project The purpose of the West Plains Transit Center is to expand connectivity to the West Plains communities and improve travel times to and from Cheney and Eastern Washington University by providing improved high quality, higher performance and costeffective transit services that will address mobility needs for an expanding population and employment base west of Spokane. Multi-modal transportation services will be enhanced through: • • • •
Improving connectivity between cities and to the West Plains area; Providing easy and fast connections to high performance transit service along the I-90 corridor; Improving transit access to residential and employment areas adjacent to Exit 272 by providing convenient transfers between local and express bus services; and Reducing congestion by providing an attractive alternative for single occupant vehicle (SOV) users.
This project will include completion of an Interchange Justification Report (IJR) process to determine the preferred solution for the construction of the West Plains Transit Center project in cooperation with STA, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC), and Spokane County. The results of the IJR will enable STA to assess options and opportunities to improve the transportation system within the study area and complete design plans for construction.
M&A - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Project Leads and Proponents • • • • • • •
Spokane Transit Authority Federal Transit Administration Federal Highway Administration Washington State Department of Transportation Spokane Regional Transportation Council Spokane County Spokane International Airport
Environmental Document Type At this time, we anticipate a NEPA Documented Categorical Exclusion (and SEPA Checklist).
Level of Documentation The proposed improvement options will include revisions to the existing eastbound off-ramp configuration, a center median westbound bus-only flyer stop or a westbound north side flyer stop with changes to the existing westbound on-ramp configuration. As required by WSDOT and FHWA, eight specific policy points will be addressed in the IJR. These are: •
Policy Point 1 documents the need for the access point revision. STA is embarking on a process of improving multimodal transportation services and developing a HPT Network. Policy Point 1 will document the need for access revisions in order to achieve the desired transit level of service to achieve that purpose.
•
Policy Point 2 provides a discussion of the reasonable alternatives evaluated. Building on previously completed studies, they will include: o
The do-nothing alternative which will include providing all transit service at the park and ride lot;
o
A center median option; and
o
A north side lane option.
•
Policy Point 3 includes the Operational & Collision Analysis. For this IJR, the only change in traffic is bus access at the Medical Lake Interchange with no changes at the upstream and downstream interchanges. As a result, this analysis will focus on either the weave or merge operations along I-90 and bus movements through the ramp terminals at the Medical Lake Interchange, depending on the preferred alternative.
•
Policy Point 4 discusses access connections and design. This policy point will include evaluation of limited improvements for bus-only access to a transit stop along the main line, connected to a park and ride lot via a pedestrian bridge. Local street access will not be changed as part of this project; although there will be a “forward compatibility” analysis with WSDOT plans for future interchange improvements (at this time these appear to be limited to roundabouts at the ramp terminals).
•
Policy Point 5 addresses compatibility with land use and transportation plans.
•
Policy Point 6 reviews compatibility with the comprehensive transportation network plan and anticipated new access points.
•
Policy Point 7 deals with coordinating projects and actions programmed for funding.
•
Policy Point 8 includes a brief summary of the environmental process.
M&A - 3
Analysis Years/Periods Operational analysis will include both AM and PM peak hours for the following years: • • •
Existing Base Year – 2014 Assumed Opening Year – 2020 Horizon/Design Year – 2040
Project and Study Areas This project will only affect transit bus routings at the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange with no impacts to the upstream or downstream interchanges. As a result, the project area for this IJR will focus on the SR 902/Medical Lake Road Interchange (Exit 272 MP 272.81) and extend along I-90 to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange (Exit 270 MP 270.55) to analyze weave and merge/diverge operations associated with the bus-only access changes. The Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange (Exit 276 MP 276.32) will not be analyzed. The study area of the local street system will include the following major street intersections: • • • • •
Eastbound ramps at SR 902/Medical Lake Road and I-90 ramp; Westbound ramps at SR 902/Medical Lake Road and I-90 ramp; W. Aero Road and W. Westbow Boulevard; W. Westbow Boulevard and S. Hayford Road; and S. Hayford Road and W. Medical Lake Road.
The overall study area for traffic forecasting purposes will include all of Spokane County, as defined by the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) travel demand model.
Traffic Operations Analysis For interstate highway operations, Highway Capacity Software (HCS) will be used to analyze merge/diverge connections. Average vehicle speed and density will be used as performance measures for the HCS analysis. For ramp terminal/surface street operations, intersections will be analyzed as follows: • • • • •
Synchro 8.0 software will be used to analyze the operations of signalized intersections. Synchro 8.0 software or HCS will be used to analyze un-signalized intersections. SIDRA software package will be used to analyze roundabout controlled intersections. SimTraffic will be used for queuing and turn lane spillover analysis. HCS will be used to analyze weave sections, merge/diverge area and level of service on the interstate.
Both AM and PM peak hour analysis will be used for the three analysis years. For the purpose of Level of Service (LOS) and traffic impact calculations, a single peak hour analysis is required. The existing peak one-hour volumes generally fall into the 7:00-8:00 AM and 4:30- 5:30 PM time periods. All traffic analysis will be reported for the AM and PM single peak hours only.
M&A - 4
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Travel Forecast For this IJR analysis, the SRTC travel demand model will be used to provide a basis for the above analysis years and periods. The SRTC model includes both the existing plus committed projects for the region from the 4-year Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) and Horizon 2040. It is anticipated that model “post-processing” will be utilized to account for localized discrepancies between existing “ground counts” and model-generated volumes. The recommended method will be the Factoring Procedure – Difference Method per NCHRP 765 Chapter 6, which add the “model growth increment” (the difference between the 2010 and the future year model volumes) to the existing ground count traffic volumes. The following 3 model runs are assumed: • • •
2010 Base Year 2020 with current four year TIP and 2020 Land Use 2040 with TIP and unfunded regional improvements and 2040 land use
Safety Issues This IJR will use the current Collision Analysis Location/Collision Analysis Corridor (CAL/CAC) criteria and the Intersection Analysis Location (IAL) criteria for state highways within the project area, as prepared by WSDOT. In addition, the collision rates along local streets will be estimated using available local collision data. Types of collisions and contributing factors will also be summarized by location. The most recent five years of available collision data will be used for this analysis. This corridor specific information, as well as statewide system collision statistics, will be used in a predictive collision analysis effort to estimate any change in the level of safety for the interstate and connecting roadways. The Highway Safety Manual will be used for this analysis.
Selection of Measures of Effectiveness The metrics to be used to demonstrate how the proposal will accomplish the stated objectives will be our measures of effectiveness (MOE). Possible metrics may include, but are not limited to, the following: • • • • • • • •
Travel time (in minutes) for bus routes on the Interstate and local streets through the project area. LOS and density along I-90 and LOS at merge and diverge locations. Average delay times (in seconds) at all ramp terminals with an LOS table. Maximum queue length on ramps and arterials (95% queue lengths). Area of critical environmental habitat impacted by improvements. Compatibility with local plans. Safety analysis results (collision potential/risk reduction). Deviations needed to implement improvements.
Deviations/Justifications The Interchange Justification Report will be developed per WSDOT Design Manual Chapter 550. The HOV direct access facilities will be designed per WSDOT Design Manual Chapter 550. At this point in the process, there are no new deviations identified. Deviations may be identified through the various study results, and will be documented as they arise.
M&A - 5
Conclusion The proposed improvement will improve transit service to be competitive with SOVs, maintain existing riders, and attract new riders, thereby reducing vehicle-miles travelled through the area. Engineering judgment will be applied to arrive at the best overall set of improvements that are the most practical within the study area.
M&A - 6
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Purpose and Need Statement Project Description The Spokane Transit Authority (STA), in cooperation with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), is completing an Interchange Justification Report and Design Plans in order to implement one element of its High Performance Transit (HPT) Network near the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange with Interstate 90 (I-90) at Exit 272. This report documents the Purpose and Need for the project, provides a summary of why transit improvements are needed in this area, including a new West Plains Transit Center with freeway flyer stops for local and express bus connections to meet area needs.
Purpose The purpose of the West Plains Transit Center is to expand connectivity to the West Plains communities and improve travel times to and from the City of Cheney and Eastern Washington University by providing improved high quality, higher performance and cost effective transit services that will address mobility needs for an expanding population and employment base west of Spokane. Multi-modal transportation services will be enhanced through:
Improving connectivity between cities and to the West Plains area; Providing easy and fast connections to HPT service along the I-90 corridor; Improving transit access to residential and employment areas adjacent to Exit 272 by providing convenient transfers between local and express bus services; and Reducing congestion by providing an attractive alternative for single occupant vehicle (SOV) users.
As part of this project, an Interchange Justification Report (IJR) will be completed to determine the preferred solution for the West Plains Transit Center project, in cooperation with FHWA, WSDOT, SRTC, Spokane County, and the Spokane International Airport. The results of the IJR will enable the project stakeholders to assess options and opportunities to improve the transportation system within the project area.
Need (Problem Definition) Between 1990 and 2012, STA’s total annual ridership increased 65 percent.1 Changes in land use and lifestyle choices have influenced the demand for competitive travel options in the West Plains area and to Eastern Washington University in Cheney. In the West Plains area, several specific problems should be addressed as part of this project to help retain and increase ridership on the current network and improve STA’s competitiveness with other modes of transportation – expressed by travel time. This is especially true as related to serving the increasing demand for competitive travel alternatives between Spokane and Cheney/Eastern Washington University (nearly 20 percent of travelers on SR 904 between I-90 and Cheney are on an STA bus). For example, currently, travel time for transit users between Spokane and Eastern Washington University is 52% more than automobile travel and yet nearly 20% percent of travelers on SR 904 (the main State Highway connecting the University to
1
Connect Spokane, A Comprehensive Plan for Public Transportation, May 2014, page 11.
P&N - 1
I-90 and on into Spokane) use the existing bus transit route. There is an increasing demand for more frequent and reliable transit service between Spokane and Cheney. The “needs” STA plans to meet by completing this project include:
Improve travel times for all users; Provide more direct bus service for the West Plains area to Eastern Washington University; Reduce operating costs; Respond to increased demand for service as a result of population and employment growth; Provide more direct transit connections between major employers in the West Plains “service area.”
Goals and Objectives Four purpose statements have been developed to guide this process, including a set of goals and objectives as shown in the table below. The Purpose and Need Statement, including the associated goals and objectives, were developed by a Technical Committee made up of representatives of participating agencies, including STA, WSDOT, FHWA, Spokane County, the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC), and the Spokane International Airport (SIA). This Purpose and Need Statement was adopted by the Core Stakeholder Group, made up from most of these same agencies, and will be presented to the public for comment as part of the outreach process. Purpose Statement
Goals & Objectives Expand the HPT Network along I-90.
1
Improve connectivity between cities and to the West Plains area.
Integrate local circulator buses with the HPT Network. Improve pedestrian and bicycle interconnectivity to the HPT Network. Improve transit speed and reliability.
2
Provide easy and fast connections to express bus service along the I-90 corridor in the West Plains area.
Improve the waiting and boarding experience. Provide a high level of pedestrian safety.
3
Improve transit access to residential and employment areas adjacent to Exit 272 by providing convenient transfers between local and express bus services.
Provide a park-and-ride facility for transit and shared-ride users.
4
Reduce congestion by providing an attractive alternative for SOV users.
Improve operational efficiency by reducing bus circulating and stop time.
Summary To meet these principles, STA must provide fast and convenient service through the West Plains area and provide competitive travel times as compared to SOVs. To provide this service, STA’s buses should minimize time on local roads and in the transit center. By routing buses through the proposed West Plain Transit Center, buses will be off I-90 for 8 to 11 minutes for each stop at the transit center, as compared to less than two minutes to access the transit station with flyer stops along I-90. By not providing freeway flyer stops, it will be more difficult for STA to provide competitive transit service to maintain existing riders, attract new riders and meet the goals associated with the West Plains Transit Center project. By incorporating flier stops along I-90 in the West Plain area, STA will be better equipped to provide fast and convenient service and meet their goals and objectives.
P&N - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Policy Point 1: Need for the Access Point Revision What are the current and projected needs? Why are the existing access points and the existing or improved local system unable to meet the proposal needs? Is the anticipated demand short or long trip?
Introduction The Spokane Transit Authority (STA), in cooperation with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), is proposing a new West Plains Transit Center with freeway flyer stops for local and express bus connections, near the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange with Interstate 90 (I-90) at Exit 272. STA’s goal is to provide fast and convenient service connecting the West Plains and Medical Lake area with downtown Spokane, Cheney, Washington, the Eastern Washington University and Spokane International Airport by providing competitive transit travel times, as compared to Single Occupant Vehicles (SOVs). To provide this service, STA’s buses should minimize time on local roads and in the transit center. By routing buses through the proposed West Plain Transit Center, buses will be off I-90 for 8 to 11 minutes for each stop at the transit center, as compared to less than two minutes to access the transit station with flyer stops along I-90.
Spokane Transit Authority West Plains Transit Center Project The STA West Plains Transit Center project is located near Exit 272 along I-90 in the West Plains area of Spokane County. The transit center will be an important element of the future High Performance Transit Network (HPTN) providing service throughout the West Plains. In early 2012, conceptual studies for the West Plains Transit Center were started. As a result of these studies, preliminary concepts and construction cost opinions were developed. After meeting with local agencies, these concepts and cost opinions were updated in March, 2013. Under the current conceptual design, the West Plains Transit Center will feature three passenger loading platforms and park and ride lot with at least 100 parking stalls. The main loading platform will feature at least three bus bays to accommodate current and future service growth. Another loading platform will be adjacent to the eastbound off-ramp and accommodate mainline transit service along I-90. The remaining loading platform will serve westbound buses along I-90 and be connected to the rest of the transit center by a pedestrian bridge. Other features will include landscaping, lighting, bicycle parking, passenger shelters, and intelligent transportation systems (ITS). Architectural treatments and design features will also be incorporated into the project. The West Plains Transit Center project will include the construction of:
100 parking stalls for commuters plus room for future expansion; Freeway bus lane (median or adjacent to westbound through lanes on north side) to create an efficient connection with frequent service to Cheney (4,000+ riders each day during Eastern Washington University school days, approximately 10% of I-90 rider throughput on the West Plains); Pedestrian bridge from the bus only freeway flyer stop to the transit center (possible extension to north side of freeway in the future for non-motorized access should the median station be the preferred option); and Three bus loading platforms to allow for additional capacity to connect to Medical Lake, Airway Heights, Fairchild Air Force Base, Spokane International Airport, and surrounding residential neighborhoods and businesses from one central location.
PP1 - 1
Purpose of this Interchange Justification Report This Interchange Justification Report (IJR) report will address several specific problems to help retain and increase ridership on the current network and improve STA’s competitiveness with other modes of transportation – expressed by travel time. This is especially true as related to serving the increasing demand for competitive travel alternatives between Spokane and Cheney/Eastern Washington University (nearly 20 percent of travelers on SR 904 between I-90 and Cheney are on an STA bus). For example, currently, travel time for transit users between Spokane and Eastern Washington University is 52% more than automobile travel and yet nearly 20% percent of travelers on SR 904 (the main State Highway connecting the University to I-90 and on into Spokane) use the existing bus transit route. And transit users from Medical Lake currently have to travel east to Downtown Spokane and then west on express buses to Cheney. There is an increasing demand for more frequent and reliable transit services between Medical Lake and Cheney, and between Spokane and Cheney. The proposed West Plains Transit Center with flyer stations should improve connectivity for travel between major employers and cities in the West Plain`s area, while providing reliable access to Spokane and Cheney. The additional transit access points along the interstate and the off-ramp for the flyer stops is the focus of this IJR. To accommodate eastbound transit express buses along I-90, a flyer stop with a loading platform adjacent to the transit center will be located on the eastbound off-ramp to the Medical Lake Interchange. A median or westbound on-ramp transit flyer stop is proposed for westbound buses traveling along I-90 with new access and egress points along I-90. The median flyer stop will be connected to the transit center by a pedestrian bridge.
Project Study Area This project will only affect transit bus routings at the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange with no impacts to the upstream or downstream interchanges. As a result, the project area for this IJR will focus on the SR 902/Medical Lake Road Interchange (Exit 272, MP 272.81) and extend along I-90 to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange (Exit 270, MP 270.55) to analyze weave and merge/diverge operations associated with the bus-only access changes. The Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange (Exit 276, MP 276.32) will not be analyzed. The study area of the local street system will include the following major street intersections:
Eastbound ramps at SR 902/Medical Lake Road and I-90 ramp; Westbound ramps at SR 902/Medical Lake Road and I-90 ramp; W. Aero Road and W. Westbow Boulevard; W. Westbow Boulevard and S. Hayford Road; and S. Hayford Road and W. Medical Lake Road.
The overall study area for traffic forecasting purposes will include all of Spokane County, as defined by the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) travel demand model. Further information about the model and assumptions for this project is summarized in the I-90/SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange Justification Report – Methods & Assumptions Documents.
PP1 - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Figure 1.1 Study Area Map
PP1 - 3
Existing and Future Needs For this IJR analysis, the SRTC travel demand models were used to provide a basis for the above analysis years and periods. The SRTC model includes both the existing plus committed projects for the region from the 4-year Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) for the County and member Cities, and the future unfunded improvements for the County and member Cities. The lists of the Horizon 2040 Regional Significant Projects are contained in Appendix PP1-A. It is anticipated that model “postprocessing” will be utilized to account for localized discrepancies between existing “ground counts” and model-generated volumes. The recommended method will be the Factoring Procedure – Difference Method per NCHRP 765 Chapter 6, which add the “model growth increment” (the difference between the 2010 and the future year model volumes) to the existing ground count traffic volumes. The following 3 model runs are assumed:
2014 Base Year 2020 with current four year TIP and 2020 land use 2040 with TIP and unfunded regional improvements and 2040 land use
Operational analysis methods and assumptions are based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010 methodology. Both AM and PM peak periods were analyzed to determine operational conditions for the following three scenarios: existing (2014), opening year (2020), and design year (2040). The existing conditions analysis was based on 2014 counts. To provide a better understanding of existing and future baseline traffic operations at the study area, Synchro models were constructed for a detailed analysis of the intersections.
Existing and Future Base Conditions Transit Travel Times Currently, there is no direct bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area to Cheney without having to travel to downtown Spokane and transferring to the Cheney/Eastern Washington University express bus. Based on published transit schedules, transit service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area takes about 20 to 25 minutes to downtown Spokane and then about 23 to 25 minutes to Cheney/Eastern Washington University via the express bus; for a total travel time of about 43 to 50 minutes, plus transfer time in downtown Spokane. By 2020, the West Plains Transit Center will be open for operations. Bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area will be re-routed to serve the new transit center and riders will be able to transfer to the Cheney/Eastern Washington University express bus. By 2040, WSDOT may complete their I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project (3 roundabouts and revised diamond interchange), the travel times for the bus service through the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections may be improved. Further information about the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement Project is contained in the I-90 SR 902 Interchange Improvements Value Engineering Study dated February 2013. For comparison purposes the following travel time analysis is based on the travel demand model, for travel through the study area from the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange.
1. Existing Transit Travel Times Today through the study area, transit buses operate at current interstate speeds on I-90 mainline. No express bus stops at the Medical lake area. The peak hour transit travel time between the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange and the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange is approximately 5 minutes.
PP1 - 4
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
2. 2020 Base Conditions Transit Travel Times In 2020, the West Plains Transit Center will be in operation. Without the flyer stop, these express buses must exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center. This re-routing will increase the express bus travel time by approximately 13 to 17 minutes, assuming the ramp intersections remain stop controlled.
3. 2040 Base Conditions Transit Travel Times By 2040, the West Plains Transit Center will have been in operations for several years. Without the flyer stop, these express buses must exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center. This re-routing will increase the express bus travel time by approximately 18 to 38 minutes, assuming the ramp intersections remain stop controlled. If the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project which is not currently completely funded would be constructed before 2040, the LOS on the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections may be improved, as well as the travel times for the bus service. Without the fly stop, the express buses exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center, the rerouting will increase the express bus travel time by approximately 8 to 11 minutes.
Existing and Future Base Conditions I-90 Freeway Operation The existing and future base conditions analysis reviewed the traffic operations of the current I-90 mainline and ramps for existing 2014, opening year 2020 and design year 2040, in the study area. Table 1.2 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour results of the freeway LOS analysis for I-90. Freeway LOS operations are measured by the density of traffic in passenger cars per mile per lane during the AM and PM peak hours. Table 1.2 Baseline Freeway Level of Service Summary Location
Type
AM Peak Hour Existing
2020
PM Peak Hour 2040
Existing
2020
2040
I‐90, Westbound I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 904
Diverge
A
A
A
A
B
B
I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
A
B
B
B
B
C
I-90 WB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
A
B
B
B
B
B
I-90 WB, under SR 902
Basic
A
A
B
B
B
B
Diverge
A
A
B
B
B
B
Basic
B
B
B
B
C
C
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
I‐90, Eastbound I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
B
B
B
A
B
B
Diverge
A
B
B
A
A
A
I-90 EB, under SR 902
Basic
A
B
B
A
A
B
I-90 EB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
B
B
B
B
B
I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Basic
B
B
C
B
B
B
I-90 EB, off-ramp to SR 902
The existing conditions analysis indicated that all freeway segments operate at LOS B or better during the AM and PM peak hour. The 2020 (opening Year) conditions analysis indicates that all freeway segments operate at LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hour. For design year 2040, the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project may be constructed; it is expected the LOS on the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections will be improved significantly. However, the WSDOT improvement project PP1 - 5
would have insignificant impact to the freeway operations. The Level of Service for the freeway operations would maintain the same with or without the ramp terminal improvements. During the AM and PM peak hour, all freeway segments operate at LOS C or better.
Existing and Future Base Condition Intersection Traffic Operation The intersection traffic operation evaluation examined five intersections in the study area, including ramp termini and adjacent intersections at the Medical Lake interchange. The LOS at each intersection is determined by average control and queue delays per vehicle in seconds. Table1.3 summarizes the intersection LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours for existing 2014, opening year 2020 and design year 2040. Table 1.3 Baseline Intersection Level of Service Summary No.
Intersection
Traffic Control1
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Existing
2020
2040
2040 with RAB
Existing
2020
2040
2040 with RAB
1
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
2
E/36.4
F/481
F/1734
A/8.6
D/28.7
F/710
F/2445
A/8
2
WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
2
D/33
F/177
F/340
A/6.7
D/30.5
F/223
F/371
A/7.8
3
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
AW
A/9.9
B/10.9
B/11.9
B/11.9
B/10.3
B/14
C/15.5
C/15.5
4
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
TW
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/9
B/13.1
B/13.7
B/13.7
5
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
TW
D/29.7
F/864
F/1994
A/3.8
F/107.2
F/3185
F/5741
A/7.2
2
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection 2. Two Way stop intersection becomes roundabout under "2040 with Roundabout" option 3. Delay is in minutes
1. Existing Intersection Traffic Operation Currently, four of the study intersections have minor street stop-controls and one intersection is all-way stop-controlled. In the AM peak hour, all intersections operate overall at LOS D or better except EB Ramp intersection which operates at LOS E. In the PM peak hour, the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road Intersection operates at LOS F with westbound failing approach.
2. 2020 Base Conditions Intersection Traffic Operation Under 2020 base conditions, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS F in Both AM and PM peak hour. The other 2 intersections would operate at LOS B or better.
3. 2040 Base Conditions Intersection Traffic Operation Year 2040 was identified as the design year based on available land use and traffic forecasts. If the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project is constructed; it is expected the LOS on the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections will be improved significantly. To better understand the traffic operations of the current facility at the design year, two different base conditions intersection analysis are conducted:
PP1 - 6
without the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) with the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) proposed by WSDOT
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Under 2040 base conditions without the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS F in both AM and PM peak hour. The other 2 intersections would operate at LOS C or better. Under 2040 base conditions with the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS A in both AM and PM peak hour. The other 2 intersections would operate at LOS C or better. Further information about the existing and future base conditions traffic analysis for this project is contained in Policy Point 3.
Summary Project Purpose: The purpose of the West Plains Transit Center is to expand connectivity to the West Plains communities and improve travel times to and from Cheney and Eastern Washington University by providing improved high quality, higher performance and cost effective transit service that will address mobility needs for an expanding population and employment base west of Downtown Spokane. Multi-modal transportation services will be improved through:
Improving connectivity between cities and to the West Plains area; Providing easy and fast connections to high performance transit service along the I-90 corridor; Improving transit access to residential and employment areas adjacent to Exit 272 by providing convenient transfers between local and express bus services; and Reducing congestion by providing an attractive alternative for single occupant vehicle (SOV) users.
Project Need: Between 1990 and 2012, STA’s total annual ridership increased 65 percent. 1Changes in land use and lifestyle choices have influenced the demand for competitive travel options, possibly no more so than in the West Plains Area and to Eastern Washington University in Cheney. In response to regional growth and the need for competitive travel options, STA has developed a plan for a High Performance Transit Network (HPTN) which is a series of corridors anticipated to provide all-day, two-way, reliable, and frequent service that will be competitive in travel speed to private automobiles. By not providing freeway flier stops, it will be harder for STA to provide competitive transit service to maintain existing riders, attract new riders and meet all the goals associated with the West Plains Transit Center project. By incorporating flier stops along I-90 in the West Plain area, there is no need for express buses to exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center. This will save the express bus travel time by approximately 8 to 11 minutes. STA will be more equipped to provide fast and convenient service and meet their goals and objectives.
1
Connect Spokane, A Comprehensive Plan for Public Transportation, May 2014, page 11. PP1 - 7
Policy Point 2: Reasonable Alternatives Describe the reasonable alternatives.
Transportation System Management Providing convenient and fast connections to a high performance transportation network that is an attractive alternative for single occupant vehicle users is the basis for this project. It means that taking a Transportation System Management (TSM) approach to the identification of alternatives for the West Plains Transit Center project will not provide an acceptable alternative to constructing a transit flyer stop in the median or adjacent to the westbound on-ramp. Without the flyer stops, it will be difficult for STA to minimize time on local roads and in the transit center. By routing buses through the proposed West Plains Transit Center on local roads, buses will be off I-90 for 8 to 11 minutes for each stop, as compared to less than two minutes to access the transit station with flyer stops along I-90. There is no evidence that other TSM applications would serve as effectively in the Design Year as the proposed flyer stops.
Improvement Alternatives Under the current conceptual design, the West Plains Transit Center will feature three passenger loading platforms and a park and ride facility with at least 100 parking stalls. The main loading platform will feature at least three bus bays to accommodate current and future service growth. Another loading platform will be adjacent to the eastbound off-ramp and accommodate mainline transit service along I-90. The remaining loading platform will serve westbound buses along I-90 and be connected to the transit center by a pedestrian bridge. Other features will include a transit-only flyer stop, transit lanes as needed, landscaping, lighting, bicycle parking, passenger shelters, and intelligent transportation systems (ITS). Architectural treatments and design features will also be incorporated into the project. This Interchange Justification Report (IJR) will evaluate the proposed alternatives as recommended by the Technical Committee and approved by the Core Stakeholder Group and the STA Board for the opening year and design year periods. These alternatives include the following four options:
Express buses using the existing street systems to access the transit center. See Alternative 1 – No Build. Express buses using a new westbound median flyer stop and a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound lanes to the westbound median flyer stop. See Alternative 2. Express buses using a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and a new westbound flyer stop adjacent to the westbound on-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound and westbound lanes to the westbound flyer stop. See Alternative 3A. Express buses using a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and a new westbound shoulder flyer stop adjacent to I-90 west of the W. Aero Road undercrossing. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound and westbound lanes to the westbound flyer stop. See Alternative 3B.
PP2 - 1
Future WSDOT Improvements The WSDOT has plans to improve the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. The project, which is in the conceptual design phase, includes the construction of three roundabouts; one at each of the ramp terminals and one at the intersection of W. Aero Road and realigned W. Geiger Boulevard. The project, which is currently unfunded, has an estimated construction cost of $18 million. Although these future improvements are to be included in the traffic analysis, they are not part of the West Plains Transit Center project. The graphic depicting the WSDOT future improvements are shown in Figure 2.5.
PP2 - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Figure 2.1 Alternative 1 – No Build
PP2 - 3
Figure 2.2 Alternative 2 – Eastbound Off-Ramp Flyer Stop and Westbound Median Flyer Stop
J-U-B Concept Plan August 30, 2012
PP2 - 4
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Figure 2.3 Alternative 3A – Eastbound and Westbound Ramp Flyer Stops
PP2 - 5
Figure 2.4 Alternative 3B – Eastbound Ramp Flyer Stop and Westbound Shoulder Flyer Stop
PP2 - 6
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Figure 2.5 WSDOT Future Improvements
WSDOT I-90/SR-902 Interchange Improvements, Value Engineering Study, February 2013
PP2 - 7
Policy Point 3: Operational and Collision Analysis How will the proposal affect safety and traffic operations at year of opening and design year?
Summary Policy Point 3 documents the operational and collision effects of the proposed build alternatives. For this Interchange Justification Report (IJR), the only change in traffic is bus access at the Medical Lake Interchange, with no changes at the upstream and downstream interchanges. As a result, this analysis will focus on the weave and merge operations along Interstate 90 (I-90) and bus movements through the ramp terminals at the Medical Lake Interchange. The analysis is consistent with the procedures outlined in the I-90/SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange Justification Report – Methods & Assumptions Document. The Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) travel demand models were used to provide a basis for the existing, 2020, and 2040 analysis years and periods. The SRTC model includes both the existing plus committed projects for the region from the 4-year Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs), as well as future regionally significant projects. The park and ride facility for the West Plains Transit Center was also included in the SRTC travel demand models as the Alternative 1 – Base Conditions. The traffic impacts related to the park and ride and associated movements through the ramp terminal, are addressed separately through the Spokane County required Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). The operational analyses for the build alternatives are summarized as follows:
Assume the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project would be completed before 2040; the Alternative 1 – Base Conditions transit travel times through the study area would be 14 minutes for westbound trips and 13 minutes for eastbound trips during the peak hours. The transit travel times for Build Alternative 2 and Build Alternative 3B would be around 7 minutes for westbound trips and 8 minutes for eastbound trips during the peak hours. The transit travel times for Build Alternative 3A would be 8 minutes for both eastbound and westbound trips. The Build Alternative 2 and Build Alternative 3B have the shortest transit travel times overall. As compared to Alternative 1 – Base Conditions, the West Plains Transit Center flyer stop build alternatives would have minor operational impact to the I-90 mainline and I-90 ramps in the study area. All freeway segments and merge/diverge areas operate at Level of Services (LOS) C or better during the peak hours for 2020 and 2040. The West Plains Transit Center flyer stops would have minor impact on the LOS for the I-90 ramp intersections and local street intersections. Without the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, all build alternatives would operate at LOS F at the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection during the peak hours for 2020 and 2040. With the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, all build alternatives would operate at LOS A at the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection during the peak hours. The weave analysis for the westbound I-90 segment between the proposed West Plains Transit Center median flyer stop and SR 904 off-ramp, shows that the freeway weave section operates at LOS C or better during the peak hours in 2040.
The collision analyses indicate that the build alternatives have minor impact on the safety of the freeway and the adjacent local street system in the study area, as compared to Alternative 1 – Base Conditions in 2040. This is because the build alternatives only involve a few express buses accessing the West Plains Transit Center during the peak hours.
PP3 - 1
Traffic Operational Analysis – Base Conditions Existing Transit Travel Times Today, there is no direct bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area to Cheney without having to travel to downtown Spokane and transferring to the Cheney/Eastern Washington University express bus. Based on published transit schedules, transit service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area takes about 20 to 25 minutes to downtown Spokane and then about 23 to 25 minutes to Cheney/Eastern Washington University via the express bus; for a total travel time of about 43 to 50 minutes, plus transfer time in downtown Spokane. For this IJR, the only change in traffic is bus access at the Medical Lake Interchange, with no changes at the other part of the bus route. As a result, this analysis will focus on a segment of the transit route within the study area. For comparison purposes, the following travel time analysis is based on the existing travel demand model, for travel through the study area from the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange, a distance of 5.77 miles. Assuming transit buses operate at current interstate posted speeds (70 mph), these peak hour travel times are: • •
Eastbound AM Peak Hour Westbound AM Peak Hour
4.8 min. 4.8 min.
• •
Eastbound PM Peak Hour Westbound PM Peak Hour
4.8 min. 4.8 min.
Existing (2014) Traffic Analyses The existing 2014 traffic analysis reviewed the freeway and intersection performance in the study area. Freeway Operations: Table 3.1 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour results of the freeway LOS analysis for I-90. In accordance with the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) freeway LOS operations are measured by the density of traffic, expressed in passenger cars per mile per lane during the AM and PM peak hours. During the AM and PM peak hour, all freeway segments operate at LOS B or better. Table 3.1 2014 Existing Freeway Levels of Service Location
Type
AM Peak Hour
LOS I-90, Westbound
PM Peak Hour
¹Density
LOS
¹Density
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 904
Diverge
A
3.3
A
8.3
I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
A
10.4
B
14.6
I-90 WB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
A
9.3
B
14.0
I-90 WB, under SR 902
Basic
A
9.2
B
13.2
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 902
Diverge
A
6.2
B
11.3
I-90 WB, East of SR 902
Basic
B
12.3
B
16.6
I-90, Eastbound I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
B
12.2
A
10.2
I-90 EB, off-ramp to SR 902
Diverge
A
8.2
A
5.8
I-90 EB, under SR 902
Basic
A
11.0
A
8.6
I-90 EB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
14.1
B
10.9
I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Basic
B
15.2
B
12.2 1 Density: vehicle/lane/mile
PP3 - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Intersections: The evaluation examined five intersections in the study area, including ramp termini and adjacent intersections. Table 3.2 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours. The LOS at each intersection is determined by average control and queue delays per vehicle in seconds, based on HCM procedures. For nonsignalized intersections, the LOS is generally determined by the worst approach or movement. For signalized intersections, an overall intersection LOS is calculated. Four of the study intersections have minor street stop-controls and one intersection, Aero Road at Westbow Boulevard, is allway stop-controlled. In the AM peak hour, all intersections operate overall at LOS D or better except Eastbound Ramp intersection which operates at LOS E. In the PM peak hour, the Hayford/Medical Lake Road Intersection operates at LOS F with westbound approach failing. Table 3.2 2014 Existing Intersection LOS Summary No
Intersection
Traffic Control
¹AM Peak Hour EB
WB
¹PM Peak Hour
NB
SB
Total
EB
A/0
A/4.2
E/36.4
D/28.7
D/33
A/2.5
A/0
D/33
A/9.3
A/9.9
1
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
2
WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
3
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
AW
A/9.1
B/11
B/10.6
4
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
TW
A/0
A/6.1
A/8.8
5
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
TW
B/13.4
D/29.7
A/0.1
E/36.4
A/1.4
WB
NB
SB
Total
A/0
A/2.8
D/28.7
D/30.5
A/1.9
A/0
D/30.5
B/10.2
B/10.3
B/11.2
A/9.8
B/10.3
A/8.8
A/0
A/5.7
A/9
D/29.7
B/10.2
F/107.2
A/0.2
A/9 A/1.3
F/107.2
1 Delay is in seconds
Future Base Conditions for 2020 (Year of Opening) and 2040 (Design Year) The traffic analysis considered 2020 as the opening year for obtaining funding, completing design and environmental documentation, acquiring necessary right-of-way (ROW) and permits, and completing construction on selected improvements. Year 2040 was identified as the design year based on available land use and traffic forecasts. Other important assumptions are as follows: •
SRTC board-approved improvements are assumed in the 2020 and 2040 models. These include a number of Spokane Transit Authority (STA) projects, such as the High Performance Transit (HPT) Network. The model also includes the WSDOT East Region regionally significant projects. See Appendix PP1-A for a list of the Horizon 2040 Regional Significant Projects.
•
The 2020 base conditions model includes the effects of funded improvements to the regional transit system, such as the planned West Plains Transit Center and park and ride lots.
The 2040 models assumed that the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project (three roundabouts and revised diamond interchange) was in place. This project is not currently completely funded and is not assumed to be by 2020. See Policy Point 2 for the proposed roundabouts from WSDOT’s I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project. The analysis of the base conditions represents the operating conditions of the West Plains Transit Center without the proposed flyer stops along I-90. The base conditions for 2020 and 2040 provide a comparison for the Proposed Build Alternative at opening and design year. Further information about the base conditions traffic volumes for this project is summarized in Appendix PP3-A. •
It is important to understand that this particular IJR is designed to discuss the operation of the West Plains Transit Center with or without the flyer stops. The issues related to the traffic operation of the ramp terminal intersections were addressed in the PP3 - 3
2013 WSDOT Final Value Engineering Study Report – I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements and will be also addressed through the Spokane County required TIA report.
2020 Base Conditions Transit Travel Times By 2020, the West Plains Transit Center will be open for operations. Bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area will be re-routed to serve the new transit center and riders will be able to transfer to the Cheney/Eastern Washington University express bus. Without the flyer stops, these express buses must exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center. This re-routing will increase the express bus travel time by approximately 13 to 17 minutes, assuming the ramp intersections remain stop controlled. For comparison purposes the following travel time analysis is based on the existing travel demand model for travel through the study area from the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange, to the transit center via local streets to and from I-90 and continue to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange. These 2020 peak hour travel times are: • •
Eastbound AM Peak Hour Westbound AM Peak Hour
20.1 min. 18.2 min.
• •
Eastbound PM Peak Hour Westbound PM Peak Hour
22.9 min. 20.3 min.
2020 Base Conditions Traffic Analyses The 2020 (opening Year) conditions were analyzed assuming current intersection controls, no flyer stops, and without the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) proposed by WSDOT. The traffic operations analysis evaluated the freeway and intersection performance for 2020 conditions in the study area. Freeway Operations: Table 3.3 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour results of the freeway LOS analysis for I-90 Freeway. LOS operations are measured by the density of traffic in passenger cars per mile per lane during the AM and PM peak hours. During the AM and PM peak hour, all freeway segments operate at LOS C or better. Table 3.3 2020 Base Conditions Freeway Levels of Service Location
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 904
AM Peak Hour
Type
LOS I-90, Westbound
PM Peak Hour
Density
LOS
Density
Diverge
A
5.1
B
10.8
I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
B
12.0
B
16.7
I-90 WB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
10.8
B
16.2
I-90 WB, under SR 902
Basic
A
10.4
B
14.5
Diverge
A
8.6
B
14.5
Basic
B
14.3
C
19.2
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
I-90, Eastbound I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
B
14.6
B
11.7
Diverge
B
11.0
A
7.5
I-90 EB, under SR 902
Basic
B
12.6
A
9.5
I-90 EB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
16.2
B
13.4
I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Basic
B
17.2
B
14.6
I-90 EB, off-ramp to SR 902
1 Density: vehicle/lane/mile
Intersections: Table 3.4 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours. The LOS at each intersection is determined by average control and queue delays per vehicle in seconds. PP3 - 4
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Under 2020 base conditions, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS F in both the AM and PM peak hour. Intersection improvements, such as signals or roundabouts are needed to improve operations, as proposed by WSDOT. The other 2 intersections would operate at LOS B or better. Table 3.4 2020 Base Conditions Intersection LOS Summary Traffic Control
No.
Intersection
1
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
2
WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
3
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
AW
4 5
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
AM Peak Hour EB
WB
PM Peak Hour
NB
SB
Total
EB
A/0
A/3.7
F/481
F/710
F/177
A/2
A/0
F/177
B/10.3
B/12.2
B/11.5
B/10.7
B/10.9
TW
A/0
A/2.8
A/8.8
A/0
TW
C/16.5
F/204
A/0.1
A/1.8
F/481
WB
NB
SB
Total
A/0
A/3.9
F/710
F/223
A/2.3
A/0
F/223
B/13.1
B/12.9
C/17.6
B/12.8
B/14
A/8.8
A/0
A/5.8
A/9
B/13.1
B/13.1
F/204
B/11.8
F/1119
A/0.1
A/1.5
F/1119
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming %HV=10%
2040 Base Conditions Transit Travel Times By 2040, the West Plains Transit Center will have been in operation for several years. Bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area have been re-routed to serve the new transit center and riders will be able to transfer to the Cheney/Eastern Washington University express bus. Without the flyer stops, these express buses must exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center. This re-routing will increase the express bus travel time by approximately 18 to 38 minutes, assuming the ramp intersections remain stop controlled. For comparison purposes the following travel time analysis is based on the existing travel demand model for travel through the study area from the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange, to the transit center via local streets to and from I-90 and continue to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange. These 2040 peak hour travel times are: •
Eastbound AM Peak Hour Westbound AM Peak Hour
34.2 min. 22.7 min.
• •
Eastbound PM Peak Hour Westbound PM Peak Hour
43.1 min. 24.9 min.
If the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project (3 roundabouts and revised diamond interchange) would be constructed before 2040, the LOS on the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections may be improved, as well as the travel times for the bus service. Without the flyer stop, the express buses exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center, the re-routing will increase the express bus travel time by approximately 8 to 11 minutes. These 2040 peak hour travel times from the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange, to the transit center via local streets to and from I-90 and continue to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange with the roundabouts are: • •
Eastbound AM Peak Hour Westbound AM Peak Hour
12.8 min. 14.9 min.
• •
Eastbound PM Peak Hour Westbound PM Peak Hour
13.2 min. 15.8 min.
2040 Base Conditions Traffic Analyses When the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project (three roundabouts and revised diamond interchange) is constructed; it is expected the LOS at the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections will be improved significantly. To better understand the traffic operations of the current facility at the design year, two different base conditions reviews are conducted: •
without the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) PP3 - 5
with the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) proposed by WSDOT
•
Freeway Operations With or Without Roundabouts: Table 3.5 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour results of the freeway LOS analysis for I-90 using the HCM procedures. During the AM and PM peak hour, all freeway segments operate at LOS C or better. LOS operations are measured by the density of traffic in passenger cars per mile per lane during the AM and PM peak hours. Table 3.5 2040 Base Conditions Freeway Levels of Service Location
Type
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 904
AM Peak Hour LOS Density I-90, Westbound
PM Peak Hour LOS Density
Diverge
A
6.8
B
14.6
I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
B
13.4
C
19.9
I-90 WB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
12.4
B
19.4
I-90 WB, Under SR 902
Basic
B
11.6
B
16.6
Diverge
B
12.3
B
17.3
B
17.3
C
21.9
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
Basic
I-90, Eastbound I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
B
17.9
B
13.6
Diverge
B
15
A
9.8
I-90 EB, Under SR 902
Basic
B
14.6
B
11.0+
I-90 EB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
18.7
B
16.4
I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Basic
C
19.6
B
I-90 EB, off-ramp to SR 902
17.6 1
Density: vehicle/lane/mile
Intersections without WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement Project Table 3.6 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours, without the WSDOT I90/Medical Lake Improvement project. Under 2040 base conditions, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS F in both AM and PM peak hour without the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project. The other two intersections would operate at LOS C or better. Table 3.6 2040 Base Conditions Intersection LOS, without I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project No 1 2 3 4 5
Intersection EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Traffic Control TW
AM Peak Hour EB
WB
NB
SB
Total
EB
A/0
A/4
F/1734
F/2445
F/340
A/1.5
A/0
F/340
F/1734
TW
PM Peak Hour WB
NB
SB
Total
A/0
A/4.8
F/2445
F/371
A/2.8
A/0
F/371
AW
B/11.4
B/13.2
B/12.2
B/11.6
B/11.9
B/14.3
B/14.4
C/19.7
B/14.4
C/15.5
TW
A/0
A/2.9
A/8.8
A/0
A/8.8
A/0
A/5.4
A/9.1
B/13.7
B/13.7
TW
C/20.7
F/738
A/0
A/1.5
F/738
B/12.3
F/5741
A/0.1
A/1.1
F/2182
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming %HV=10%
PP3 - 6
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Intersections with WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement Project Table 3.7 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours, with the WSDOT I90/Medical Lake Improvement project. Under 2040 base conditions with the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS A in both the AM and PM peak hour. The other two intersections would operate at LOS C or better. Table 3.7 2040 Base Conditions Intersection LOS Summary, with I-90/Medical Lake Improvement Project No
Intersection
Traffic Control
1
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
RA
2
WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
RA
3
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
AW
4
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
5
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
AM Peak Hour EB
WB
PM Peak Hour
NB
SB
Total
EB
A/9.5
A4.6
A/8.6
B/13.8
A/8.3
A/3.7
A/7.6
A/6.7
B/11.4
B/13.2
B/12.2
B/11.6
B/11.9
TW
A/0
A/2.9
A/8.8
A/0
RA
A/0.6
A/6.0
A/3.6
B/16.3
WB
NB
SB
Total
A/9.8
A/4.9
A/8
A/8.5
A/3.6
A/9.5
A/7.8
B/14.3
B/14.4
C/19.7
B/14.4
C/15.5
A/8.8
A/0
A/5.4
A/9.1
B/13.7
B/13.7
A/3.0
A/0.8
A/9.4
A/4.1
A/4.7
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming %HV=10%
Traffic Operational Analyses – Build Alternatives This IJR evaluates the proposed build alternatives as recommended by the Technical Committee and approved by the Core Stakeholder Group and the STA Board for the opening year and design year periods. These build alternatives include the following three options: 1. Express buses using a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and a new westbound median flyer stop. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound lanes to the westbound median flyer stop. See Build Alternative 2 outlined in Policy Point 2. 2. Express buses using a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and a new westbound flyer stop adjacent to the westbound on-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound and westbound lanes to the westbound flyer stop. See Build Alternative 3A outlined in Policy Point 2. 3. Express buses using a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and a new westbound flyer stop adjacent to I-90 west of the W. Aero Road undercrossing. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound and westbound lanes to the westbound flyer stop. See Build Alternative 3B outlined in Policy Point 2.
Forecasting Travel Demand for Build Alternatives The SRTC travel demand models were used to provide the base condition travel demand within the study area. These models assume that both inbound and outbound express buses are travelling on Mainline I-90 at the Medical Lake Interchange. For each build alternative, buses routing adjustments were manually entered to account for predicated volume shifts based on the access differences between build alternatives. When the West Plains Transit Center opens for operation, bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area will be re-routed to serve the new transit center. The STA forecasts that there will be five outbound transit trips and five inbound transit trips servicing the transit center during the AM and PM peak hours for 2020 and 2040. These trips were re-routed among the build alternatives. For example, Build Alternative
PP3 - 7
2 assumes the median flyer stop with pedestrian bridge, so the inbound trips were re-routed away from the mainline I-90 to the westbound flyer stop. 2020 and 2040 AM and PM peak hour forecast for the freeway and freeway ramps for the Alternative 1 – No Build and three build alternatives were analyzed with a maximum of five bus trips (four STA Route 66 bus trips and one STA Route 63 bus trip) being re-routed, the differences in traffic volumes on the freeway and freeway ramps between the build alternatives are minor. 2020 and 2040 AM and PM peak hour traffic assignments at the various intersections for the Alternative 1 – No Build and three build alternatives are adjusted with the re-routing of five bus trips. With only this slight change, the differences in turning movements at the ramp intersections and local intersections are minor. 2020 and 2040 traffic volumes for this project are contained in Appendix PP3-A.
Transit Travel Time for Build Alternatives By 2020, the West Plains Transit Center will be open for operation. Bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area will be re-routed to serve the new transit center and riders will be able to transfer to the Cheney/Eastern Washington University express bus along I-90. By 2040, WSDOT may complete their I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project (three roundabouts and revised diamond interchange), the travel times for the bus service through the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections may be improved. Table 3.8 provides the transit travel time comparison among the build alternatives for the opening year 2020 and the design year 2040. For comparison purposes the travel time analysis is based on the travel demand model, for travel through the study area from the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange. Table 3.8 2020 and 2040 Transit Travel Time (in minutes) 2020 (Opening Year) Location
Peak Hour
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3A
2040 (Design Year) Alternative 3B
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
I-90, Westbound Without WSDOT Roundabouts With WSDOT Roundabouts*
AM
18.2
6.4
11.4
6.4
22.7
6.5
15.7
6.5
PM
20.3
6.5
13.0
6.5
24.9
6.7
17.4
6.7
AM
-
-
-
-
14.9
6.5
7.8
6.5
PM
-
-
-
-
15.8
6.7
8.1
6.7
34.2
29.2
29.2
29.2
I-90, Eastbound Without WSDOT Roundabouts
AM
20.1
14.2
14.2
14.2
PM
22.9
16.4
16.4
16.4
43.1
37.7
37.7
37.7
With WSDOT Roundabouts*
AM
-
-
-
-
12.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
-
-
-
-
13.2
7.8
7.8
7.8
PM
* WSDOT interchange improvements (roundabouts) are planned to be constructed by 2040. Travel time with roundabout for 2020 was not analyzed.
As shown in Table 3.8, Build Alternative 2 and Build Alternative 3B have the shortest transit travel time during the AM and PM peak hours in 2020 and 2040. Something to note is that although westbound busses travel a greater distance, and through three intersections, to reach the transit center then eastbound busses, the travel times are faster. This is because the ramp terminals are stop controlled, but the movement south on Aero Road is free flowing. Additionally, the westbound ramp terminal at SR 902 / I-90 operates more efficiently than the eastbound ramp terminal at SR 902/I-90 as can be seen in Tables 3.2, 3.4 and 3.6
PP3 - 8
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
2020 Build Alternative Traffic Analyses The 2020 (opening Year) conditions analysis reviewed the traffic operations of the build alternatives. The traffic operations analysis evaluated the freeway and intersection performance for 2020 opening conditions in the study area. Freeway Operations: Table 3.9 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour results of the freeway LOS analysis for I-90 freeway. Because there are only minor variations of traffic volumes on I-90 among the build alternatives, the LOS for each build alternative remains the same. During the AM and PM peak hour, among all of the build alternatives, all freeway segments operate at LOS C or better. Table 3.9 2020 Freeway Levels of Service for Build Alternatives AM Peak Hour Location
Type
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
PM Peak Hour
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
I-90, Westbound I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 904 I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 WB, on-ramp from SR 902 I-90 WB, Under SR 902 I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
Diverge
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
Basic
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Merge
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Basic
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
Diverge
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
Basic
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
C
I-90, Eastbound I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 EB, off-ramp to SR 902
Basic
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Diverge
B
B
B
B
A
A
A
A
I-90 EB, Under SR 902
Basic
B
B
B
B
A
A
A
A
I-90 EB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Basic
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Intersections: Table 3.10 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours. The LOS at each intersection is determined by average control and queue delays per vehicle in seconds. Because there are minor variations in traffic turning volumes at ramp intersections and local streets among the build alternatives, the LOS for each build alternative remains the same as the Alternative 1 – No Build. For opening year 2020, the I90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS F in both the AM and PM peak hour. The other two intersections would operate at LOS B or better.
PP3 - 9
Table 3.10 2020 Intersection Levels of Service for Build Alternatives AM Peak Hour No.
1 2 3 4 5
Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Traffic Control1
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3a
TW
F/481
F/362.5
TW
F/177
AW
PM Peak Hour Alternative 3b
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3a
Alternative 3b
F/362.5
F/362.5
F/710
F/508.3
F/508.3
F/508.3
F/156
F/177
F/156
F/223
F/212
F/223
F/212
B/10.9
B/10.9
B/10.9
B/10.9
B/14
B/14
B/14
B/14
TW
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
B/13.1
B/13.1
B/13.1
B/13.1
TW
F/204
F/204
F/204
F/204
F/1119
F/1119
F/1119
F/1119
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection
2040 Build Alternative Traffic Analyses When the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project (three roundabouts and revised diamond interchange) is constructed; it is expected that the LOS on the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections will be improved. To better understand the traffic operations of the build alternatives at the design year, the same two conditions used to analyze the Alternative 1 – No Build are also analyzed for the build alternatives:
without the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) with the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) proposed by WSDOT
Freeway Operations With or Without the Roundabouts: If the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project were completed, it would improve the traffic operations at the ramp terminal intersections, but would have insignificant impact to freeway operations. The Level of Service for the freeway operations would remain the same with or without the ramp terminal improvements. Table 3.11 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour results of the freeway LOS analysis for the I-90 freeway. LOS operations are measured by the density of traffic in passenger cars per mile per lane during the AM and PM peak hours. During the AM and PM peak hour, all freeway segments for all build alternatives operate at LOS C or better.
PP3 - 10
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Table 3.11 2040 Freeway Levels of Service for Build Alternatives AM Peak Hour Location
Type
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
PM Peak Hour
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
I-90, Westbound I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 904 I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 WB, on-ramp from SR 902 I-90 WB, Under SR 902 I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
Diverge
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
Basic
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
C
Merge
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Basic
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Diverge
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Basic
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
C
I-90, Eastbound I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 EB, off-ramp to SR 902 I-90 EB, Under SR 902 I-90 EB, on-ramp from SR 902 I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Basic
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Diverge
B
B
B
B
A
A
A
A
Basic
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Merge
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Basic
C
C
C
C
B
B
B
B
Intersections without WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement Project Table 3.12 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours, without the WSDOT I90/Medical Lake Improvement project. For 2040 build alternatives without the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS F in both the AM and PM peak hour. The other two intersections would operate at LOS C or better. Table 3.12 2040 Intersection Levels of Service for Build Alternative, Without Roundabouts AM Peak Hour No.
1 2 3 4 5
Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Traffic Control1
PM Peak Hour
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3a
Alternative 3b
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3a
Alternative 3b
TW
F/1734
F/1355
F/1355
F/1355
F/2445
F/1855
F/1855
F/1855
TW
F/340
F/320
F/340
F/320
F/371
F/354
F/371
F/354
AW
B/11.9
B/11.9
B/11.9
B/11.9
C/15.5
C/15.5
C/15.5
C/15.5
TW
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
B/13.7
B/13.7
B/13.7
B/13.7
TW
F/738
F/738
F/738
F/738
F/2182
F/2182
F/2182
F/2182
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection
PP3 - 11
Intersections with WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement Project Table 3.13 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours, with the WSDOT I90/Medical Lake Improvement project. For the 2040 build alternatives with the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS A in both the AM and PM peak hour. The other two intersections would operate at LOS C or better. Table 3.13 2040 Intersection Levels of Service for Build Alternative, with roundabouts AM Peak Hour No.
Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
1 2 3 4 5
Traffic Control1
PM Peak Hour
Alternative 1 Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3a
Alternative 3b
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3a
Alternative 3b
RA
A/8.6
A/8.6
A/8.6
A/8.6
A/8
A/8
A/8
A/8
RA
A/6.7
A/6.7
A/6.7
A/6.7
A/7.8
A/7.8
A/7.8
A/7.8
AW
B/11.9
B/11.9
B/11.9
B/11.9
C/15.5
C/15.5
C/15.5
C/15.5
TW
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
B/13.7
B/13.7
B/13.7
B/13.7
RA
A/3.0
A/3.0
A/3.0
A/3.0
A/4.7
A/4.7
A/4.7
A/4.7
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Two Way stop intersection becomes roundabout under "2040 with Roundabout" option
Weave Analysis for Build Alternative 2 Build Alternative 2 has westbound express buses stopping at a new westbound median flyer stop and a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange is used by eastbound express buses. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound lanes to the westbound median flyer stop. There was a concern about buses being able to accelerate from a median flyer stop located immediately west of the I-90/SR 902 Interchange and exit at the I-90/SR 904 Interchange to the west. To evaluate this concern, a weave analysis was conducted for the westbound I-90 segment between the proposed West Plains Transit Center median flyer stop and SR 904 off-ramp, with the methodology defined by the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, assuming 2040 as the design year. The analysis shows that:
During the AM peak hour, the freeway weave section operates at LOS B During the PM peak hour, the freeway weave section operates at LOS C
This analysis shows that a bus exiting the median flyer stop has approximately 4,360 feet after entering the freeway mainline, to change lanes and exit the freeway at SR 904. The section of I-90 between the proposed median flyer stop and the off-ramp to SR 904 is on a tangent section with level terrain. Based on these conditions and the volumes presented in the analysis, the weave distance provided is adequate to safely make the maneuver in all weather conditions. The weave analysis detail is summarized in the I-90/SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange Justification Report – Weave Analysis Technical Memorandum.
PP3 - 12
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Collision Analysis – Base Conditions A five-year collision analysis was conducted along I-90 from SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange (Exit 270, MP 270.55) to Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange (Exit 276, MP 276.32), including ramps and cross streets within the study area, as illustrated in Figure 3.1 and 3.2. Collisions varied throughout the corridor, with causes ranging from driver inattention, to speeding, following too closely, and other factors. The collision analysis used five year data and classified the collisions by type and severity. Overall, the collision rate on I-90 through the project area (143.7 per MVM) is below the statewide (175.9 per MVM, 2012 Washington State Annual Collision Summary) and Spokane County (171.2 per MVM, 2012 Washington State Annual Collision Summary) collision rates. Based on WSDOT’s safety assessment, there are no Collision Analysis Corridors (CACs), Collision Analysis Locations (CALs), or Intersection Analysis Locations (IALs) along this section of I-90. The collision total throughout the study area varies on a yearly basis, with the average of 35 mainline collisions per year with an additional 7 collisions per year on ramps and cross streets. This is a total of 42 collisions per year. Figure 3.1 Number of I-90 Collisions by Years
Collisions
I-90 Collision Summary By Year (MP 270 to MP 276) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Ramps and Cross Streets I-90 2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Year
Figure 3.2 I-90 Mainline Collisions by Type
Collisions by Type on I-90 Mainline MP 270 to MP 276 January 2009 to December 2013
Vehicle Overturn, 33 Sideswipe, 16
Fixed Object, 68 Rear End, 44 Other, 39
PP3 - 13
Types of Collision Occurring Between January 2009 and December 2013, there were 200 collisions reported along this section of I-90. These collisions are generally grouped according to type. For this analysis the following types are used: • • • • •
Rear-end collisions; Overturn collisions; Fixed object collisions; Sideswipe collisions; and Other collisions.
The Other Collision category includes vehicle/animal related collisions, and those collision types are not identified. Figure 3.2 shows a breakdown of the collision types and number along I-90 mainline. This collision chart clearly indicates that fixed object and sideswipe collisions accounted for nearly 56 percent of the mainline collisions. Contributing Circumstances for Collisions Driver contributing circumstances for collisions (as reported by the responding police officer) along this section of I-90 are summarized on Figure 3.3. Figure 3.3 I-90 Driver Contributing Circumstances for Collisions Other, 13 Operating Defective Equipment, 14
Under Influence of Alcohol / Drugs, 11
Apparently Asleep, 6
Did Not Grant RW to Vehicle, 11 Driver Distractions, 9
None Listed, 20 Exceeding Reas. Safe Speed, 89 Inattention, 10
Follow Too Closely, 21
Drivers who are exceeding reasonable speed, following too closely, inattention, and driver distractions combine for 63 percent of the mainline collisions, while drivers operating defective equipment accounted for another 7 percent of mainline collisions. About five percent of the I-90 mainline collisions involve alcohol or drugs. Severity of Collisions As can be observed from Figure 3.4, property damage only collisions comprise 63 percent of all collisions. There was only one collision involving a fatality over the five year period along I-90 within the study area. Overall, less than 20 percent of the collisions involved serious injury, evident injury, or a fatality. These median percentages of property damage or possible injury collisions are characteristic in areas of non-congested traffic throughout the interstate system.
PP3 - 14
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Figure 3.4 I-90 5 Year Collisions by Severity (January 2009 to December 2013) Dead at Scene, 1
Unknown, 2
Serious Injury, 5 Evident Injury, 27
Possible Injury, 29
Property Damage Only, 111
ISATe (Enhanced Interchange Safety Analysis Tool) Analysis For this analysis, the ISATe was performed to determine if the existing safety performance analysis is normal for the existing highway configuration. The existing ISATe analysis included comparing the collision types and severities between the observed collisions and model outputs from January 2009 to December 2013. As can be observed from Table 3.14, the ISATe analysis results were consistent with the existing collision data. No over dispersions of collision type or severities were observed. Table 3.14 ISATe Projected Collision vs Observed Collision for Study Area January 2009 to December 2013
Collision Type
Multi Vehicle
Single Vehicle
ISATe Collisions
Observed Collisions
Head on
1
3
Right Angle
2
15
Rear End
23
40
Other
17
2
Animal
5
9
Fixed Object
56
56
34
46
5 Year Total
Other
138
171
5 Year Average
28
35
Collision Analysis – Build Alternatives The collision rate along this section of I-90 is expected to increase over the next twenty years without improvements due to:
Increases in traffic volumes which will result in increased congestion; Queue back-ups along off-ramps will extend onto the I-90 mainline, resulting in traffic stopping on the interstate; and Drivers will have a greater tendency to shift lanes to avoid stopping which will increase sideswipe and rear-end collisions.
As stated in Policy Point 1, the purpose of the West Plains Transit Center is to expand connectivity to the West Plains communities and improve transit travel times to and from Cheney and Eastern Washington University. By incorporating flyer stops along I-90 in the West Plains area, there is no need for express buses to exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access PP3 - 15
the transit center. Because there would be fewer bus trips on the ramps, at the ramp termini and through the nearby intersections with the flyer stops, there may be a decrease in the overall interchange collision rate, as compared to no flyer stops. Based on the FHWA Highway Safety Manual, the ISATe models were performed to predict the safety performance of the future Alternative 1 – No Build and the build alternatives. The predicted safety performance indicators include types and severities of collisions that contribute to the safety impacts of the freeway and the adjacent local streets for 2020 and 2040. Table 3.15 2020 and 2040 ISATe Collision Analysis for Build Alternatives 2020 Collision Type
Multi Vehicle
Single Vehicle Total
Head on Right Angle Rear End Other Animal Fixed Object Other
2040
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
13
13
13
13
15
15
15
15
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
36
36
36
36
42
42
42
42
Because the build alternatives only provide improvements for express bus access to the West Plains Transit Center, the safety impact to the interchange is minimal. As expected and can be observed from Table 3.15, the ISATe analysis results demonstrated that the build alternatives do not have a significant adverse impact on the safety of the freeway or the adjacent local street system in the study area, as compared to Alternative 1 – No Build in 2040.
PP3 - 16
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Policy Point 4: Access Connections and Design Will the proposal provide fully directional interchanges connected to public streets or roads, spaced appropriately, and designed to full design level geometric control criteria?
Summary The proposed freeway flyer stops are designed to provide fast and convenient transit service, connecting the West Plains and Medical Lake area with downtown Spokane, the City of Cheney, Eastern Washington University and the Spokane International Airport, through the West Plains Transit Center, located at the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange with Interstate 90 (I-90). With this project, the Spokane Transit Authority (STA) is able to efficiently operate express buses along I-90 and minimize time on local roads and in the transit center. By routing buses through the flyer stops, buses will be off I-90 for less than two minutes as compared to the 8 to 11 minutes for buses using local streets to access the transit center. The combined flyer stops and bus exclusive ramps are designed to meet full design standards, allow pedestrians to move quickly and safely to meet express buses, and reduce travel time for all users. With the conceptual level design completed, no design deviations have been identified for the eastbound off-ramp flyer stop. A shoulder width deviation may be required for the median flyer stop, but additional survey information is required to determine the need. The proposed flyer stops do not alter the existing interchange spacing, which exceed the rural interchange spacing requirements. Further information about the alternative selection for this project is summarized in the Alternative Review and Selection Technical Memorandum attached as Appendix PP4-A.
Conceptual Layout and Signing Plans The conceptual layouts and signing plans for the proposed flyer stops connected to STA West Plains Transit Center project are illustrated on Preferred Alternative Plan Sheet 1 through 5 attached as Appendix PP4-B. These conceptual layouts show the proposed flyer stops, bus ramps, and signing plans to direct buses/pedestrians through the interchange. The flyer stops and exclusive bus ramps will be designed to full design standards including lane and shoulder width, and vertical and horizontal alignments. The median flyer stop provides westbound express transit service and the eastbound off-ramp flyer stop provides eastbound transit service to the STA West Plains Transit Center. These conceptual plans will be further developed during preliminary design as part of the environmental documentation phase of the project.
Present and Future Interchange Spacing The proposed flyer stops associated with STA’s West Plains Transit Center project maintains the existing interchange spacing. The distance between the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and the SR 904/Four Lakes/Cheney Interchange to the west is approximately 2.26 miles. The distance between the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange to the east is approximately 3.51 miles. The interchange spacing for the West Plains Transit Center project exceeds the minimum spacing. The distance between the gore areas for adjacent ramps along westbound mainline I-90 from the proposed transit only ramp to the westbound off-ramp at the SR 904/Four Lakes/Cheney Interchange is greater than 4,300 feet, which exceeds the minimum requirements of 2,000 feet (WSDOT Design Manual Page 1360-7). The distance between gore areas for the existing eastbound on-ramp at the SR 904/Four Lakes/Cheney Interchange to the modified eastbound off-ramp at the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange along the eastbound mainline is greater than 10,000 feet and also surpass the minimum requirements. PP4 - 1
Policy Point 5: Land Use and Transportation Plans Is the proposed access point revision compatible with all land use and transportation plans?
Introduction In order to assess the compatibility of the West Plains Transit Center Interchange Justification Report (IJR) with existing land use and transportation plans for the area, the following documents were reviewed: • • • • •
Connect Spokane – A Comprehensive Plan for Public Transportation (revised 2014) I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements (2013) Spokane County Comprehensive Plan (2012) Horizon 2040 – Spokane Metropolitan Transportation Plan (2013) The Washington Transportation Plan (WTP 2007 – 2026, and WTP 2030) (revised 2010)
For this IJR analysis, the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) travel demand models are used to provide a basis for the analysis years and periods. The SRTC model includes existing year land uses for the existing base calibration and analysis, as well as future year land uses in accordance with approved zoning classifications and Office of Financial Management (OFM) development guidelines. To be consistent with current transportation planning assumptions, these models also include the existing land use plus committed projects for the region from the 4-year Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) and Horizon 2040.
Connect Spokane – A Comprehensive Plan for Public Transportation The Interstate 90 (I-90) express flier stops with pedestrian connections to the West Plains Transit Center are included in the Spokane Transit Authority’s 2014 Comprehensive Plan for Public Transportation. The purpose is to expand connectivity to the West Plains communities and improve travel times to and from the City of Cheney and Eastern Washington University by providing improved high-quality, higher performance, cost effective transit services that address mobility needs for an expanding population and employment base west of Spokane. Multi-modal transportation services will be enhanced through: • • • •
Improving connectivity between cities and the West Plains area; Providing easy and fast connections to High Performance Transit (HPT) service along the I-90 corridor; Improving transit access to residential and employment areas adjacent to Exit 272 by providing convenient transfers between local and express bus services; and Reducing congestion by providing an attractive alternative for single occupant vehicle (SOV) users.
I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements and Washington Transportation Plan It is important to understand that this particular IJR is designed to discuss the operation of the West Plains Transit Center with or without the proposed express bus flyer stops with pedestrian connections. The issues related to the traffic operation of the ramp terminal intersections were addressed in the 2013 WSDOT Final Value Engineering Study Report – I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements. The proposed express bus flyer stops with pedestrian connections are consistent with the improvements listed the I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements project and the Washington Transportation Plan, and does not adversely affect these plans.
PP5 - 1
Spokane County Comprehensive Plan In 2012 Spokane County Comprehensive Plan, the West Plains Transit Center and surrounding area is designated as one of the Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) in Spokane County. A primary basis for the UGA requirement is the economical and efficient provision of public services, which includes the public transit service. The Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Chapter 2 also indicates the land use for the West Plains Transit Center area as “Regional Commercial Area”, surrounded by light industrial and low density residential areas. This “mixed-use” area is characterized as: • • • •
Housing and employment densities to support frequent transit service; Public transit connections to other Centers and Corridors; Safe, attractive bus stops and pedestrian and bicycle ways; and Buildings which front on wide sidewalks with attractive landscaping, benches and frequent transit stops.
The proposed express bus flyer stops with pedestrian connections are consistent with the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan, and enhances the Plan by providing fast and efficient transit service to the area.
Horizon 2040 – Spokane Metropolitan Transportation Plan Horizon 2040 is the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) for the Spokane metropolitan planning area developed by SRTC. It is a plan for an integrated, accessible, multi-modal transportation system to safely and efficiently move people and goods through the year 2040. The plan identifies a list of projects and programs expected to be implemented between today and the year 2040. Horizon 2040 also includes a list of unfunded transportation needs that are important to the region should additional funding become available. The I-90 express flier stops with pedestrian connections to the West Plains Transit Center are included in the Horizon 2040 and listed as a short-term regionally significant project (described as the West Plains Transit Center – Project 9).
Summary The proposed express bus flyer stops with pedestrian connections to the West Plains Transit Center are consistent with the applicable land use and transportation plans.
PP5 - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Policy Point 6: Future Interchanges Is the proposed access point revision compatible with a comprehensive network plan? Is the proposal compatible with other known new access points and known revisions to existing points?
Introduction There is no comprehensive network plan for this section of Interstate 90 (I-90) and there are no new interchanges proposed within five miles of the I-90/SR 902 Interchange. The interchange improvements proposed as part of the West Plains Transit Center project are compatible with Connect Spokane – A Comprehensive Plan for Public Transportation, as described in Policy Point 5.
Future WSDOT Improvements WSDOT is currently considering options to construct improvements to the I-90/SR 902 Interchange in order to keep up with anticipated future demand. In January 2013, WSDOT preformed a value engineering (VE) study, I-90/SR-902 Interchange Improvements (February 2013), identifying future improvements to the interchange. The project, which is in the planning phase, is currently unfunded. The preferred improvements identified in the VE study include three new roundabouts – one at each of the ramp terminals and one at the intersection of W. Aero Road and W. Geiger Boulevard (see Figure 6.1). The I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements project would include minor re-alignments of the ramp terminals at the roundabouts. The West Plains Transit Center median flyer stop and eastbound off-ramp stop are not impacted by the ramp terminal reconstruction proposed as part of the I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements project.
Summary To date, there are no proposed new access points planned from I-90/SR-904 (west) to I-90/South Grove Road (east) within the project vicinity. The preferred alternative for the West Plains Transit Center improvement project is compatible with the WSDOT I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvement project described above.
PP6 - 1
Figure 6.1 I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements
PP6 - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Policy Point 7: Coordination Are all coordinating projects and actions programmed and funded?
Funding Spokane Transit Authority (STA) has committed to building the West Plains Transit Center park and ride facility, regardless of the alternative median access flyer stop or the alternative ramp access stops. The Transit Center facility may route buses on local roads, rather than I-90. STA has already surveyed the lot for purchase and after the appraisals are approved by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), STA will move forward with the purchase of the parcel. STA was awarded a $951,500 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Grant from the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) in July 2013. Combined with $148,500 in STA local funds, the initial project budget was $1.1 million for preliminary design. In June 2015, STA received a Regional Mobility Grant from Washington State in the amount of $8.7 million to complete engineering design and partially fund construction of the transit center. $1.7 million will be available in the 2015-2017 biennium and $7 million will be available in the 2017-2019 biennium. STA is currently seeking the remaining funding to complete the project.
Project Coordination The Interchange Justification report (IJR) requires the participation of various stakeholders, including Federal and State government, local agencies and private organizations. The results of the IJR enable the project stakeholders to assess options and opportunities to improve the transportation system within the project area. The below listed lead agencies were consulted during the course of the IJR development:
Spokane Transit Authority Federal Transit Administration Federal Highway Administration Washington State Department of Transportation Spokane Regional Transportation Council Spokane County Spokane International Airport
An open house was held in late March 2015. The public comments were collected in order to help move the project forward. As discussed in the previous chapter, WSDOT has plans to improve the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. The plan includes the construction of 3 roundabouts; one at each of the ramp terminals and one at the intersection of W. Aero Road and re-aligned W. Geiger Boulevard. Although it is not directly related to the alternative median access flyer stop or the alternative ramp access stops, WSDOT’s project will provide acceptable levels of service for the SR 902/Medical Lake interchange and provide the necessary infrastructure to improve the traffic flow to and from the West Plain Transit Center.
PP7 - 1
Policy Point 8: Environmental Process What is the status of the proposal’s environmental processes? This section should be something more than just a status report of the environmental process; it should be a brief summary of the environmental process.
Environmental Approval and Permitting Process The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in cooperation with the Spokane Transit Authority (STA) plans to complete the environmental phase of the project in 2015. Both NEPA and SEPA documentation will be prepared. For the NEPA documentation, it is assumed that the West Plains Transit Center project will be classified as a Categorical Exclusion (CE). This is based on the proposed action of constructing a new transit facility. There is no known public opposition for the project. Resources with the potential for impact include property, hazardous materials and potentially wetlands. Cultural resources survey and compliance with Section 106 will be completed as part of the environmental process. It can be expected that impacts will not be significant. For SEPA documentation, a separate checklist will be prepared. It is anticipated that the project will be issued a Determination of Non-Significance. Preparation of the NEPA and SEPA documentation will take place in 2015. The NEPA and SEPA documentation will be supported by analysis of the following resources:
Water Resources Wildlife Resources Cultural Resources Air Noise Hazardous Materials Land Use Socio-economic
The following permits and approvals are anticipated:
NEPA Categorical Exclusion SEPA Determination of Non-significance Army Corps of Engineers – Section 404 Permit Section 106 compliance WA Department of Ecology – Section 401 Water Quality Certification WA Department of Ecology – NPDES Construction Permit Spokane County Critical Areas Ordinance – Authorization
PP8 - 1
Appendix Policy Point 1 - A
Appendix PP1-A Table 4.10 Horizon 2040 Short‐Term Regionally Significant Projects 2014 ‐ 2020 Project Number
Project
Description
Jurisdiction
Project Cost (2014 $)
Year of Expenditure Cost
City of Spokane
$6,510,000
$6,510,000
1
Riverside Drive Phase 2
2
North Indian Trail ‐ Kathleen to Barnes Widen to four lanes with center turn lane
City of Spokane
$3,000,000
$3,205,030
3
Barker Rd. Overpass
Reconstruct Barker Rd. to pass over three BNSF tracks and SR 290
City of Spokane Valley
$26,000,000
$29,208,846
4
Bigelow Gulch Rd. Project 2 ‐ urban boundary to East Weile St.
Widen to four lanes with center turn lane
Spokane County
$10,955,000
$12,389,086
5
Bigelow Gulch Rd. Project 3 ‐ East Weile to Jensen
Widen to four lanes with center turn lane
Spokane County
$4,553,518
$4,952,000
6
Bigelow Gulch Rd. Project 4 ‐ Old Argonne Rd to Evergreen Rd
Widen to four lanes with center turn lane
Spokane County
$14,257,569
$14,678,000
7
Spokane County
$6,115,660
$6,296,000
STA
$63,563,718
$71,408,572
9
Bigelow Gulch Rd. Project 4A ‐ Forker Bigelow Gulch overpass at Forker Rd Connector HPTN G2 ‐ Central City Line Construct a Modern Electric Trolleybus from Browne's Addition to West Plains Transit Center Park & ride transit center in the vicinity of I‐90 Exit 272
STA
$11,571,837
$13,000,000
10
Interstate 90 ‐ Medical Lake I/C
Interchange modifications
WSDOT
$25,000,000
$27,634,432
11
Interstate 90 ‐ Geiger I/C
Interchange modifications
WSDOT
$10,000,000
$11,573,445
12
Interstate 90 ‐ Barker Rd I/C
Construct general purpose lanes and replace Barker Rd I/C
WSDOT
$26,500,000
$29,969,036
13
Interstate 90 ‐ Barker I/C Vic. to Harvard I/C Vic. NSC ‐ Spokane River to Francis Ave. Phase 1
Construct general purpose lanes
WSDOT
$32,000,000
$38,856,707
Construct new 4 lane section between Francis and the Spokane River including railroad realignment and Wellesley I/C. Also
WSDOT
$230,000,000
$260,108,613
Interstate 90 ‐ Freya WB Off‐Ramp
Ramp modifications
WSDOT
$3,900,000
$4,136,258
$473,927,300
$533,926,026
8
14 15
Extension of Riverside Dr. from Sherman to Trent & Perry
Subtotal $
Table 4.11 Horizon 2040 Mid‐Term Regionally Significant Projects 2021 – 2030 Project Number
Project
Description
Jurisdiction
Project Cost (2014 $)
Year of Expenditure Cost
16
SR27/SR290 Underpass
Construct underpass for vehicular traffic under BNSF tracks
City of Spokane Valley
$16,000,000
$18,275,802
17
Bigelow Gulch Rd. Project 5 ‐ Forker Connector
Widen Forker from Progress to Bigelow Gulch Rd to four lanes with center turn lane
Spokane County
$10,952,354
$12,353,000
18
Bigelow Gulch Rd. Project 6 ‐ Forker Connector
Spokane County
$8,925,510
$10,195,054
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Valley HPT Corridor Preservation NSC ‐ Spokane River to Francis Phase 2 SR 904/Betz Road to I 90 US 395 from Half Moon Rd. to Stevens Interstate 90 ‐ Henry Road I/C NSC ‐ Trent Ave. to Spokane River NSC ‐ Inerstate 90 North Access NSC ‐ Collector Distributor System
Widen Forker to four lanes with center turn lane from Evergreen to Wellesley, including intersection improvements at Acquire right of way for the future implementation of Construct full interchanges and roadway Phase 2 Construct additional lanes for a five‐lane roadway Construct passing lanes Replace Greenacres I/C with one at Henry Road Construct interchange and roadway for half of facility Construct interchange and roadway for half of facility Reconstruction I‐90 with C/D system Phase 1
STA WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT Subtotal $
$8,754,746 $70,000,000 $18,000,000 $10,000,000 $26,500,000 $155,500,000 $190,000,000 $82,000,000 $596,632,610
$10,000,000 $83,625,191 $21,816,080 $12,755,335 $34,352,039 $204,804,878 $254,190,168 $109,703,125 $772,070,672
Table 4.12 Horizon 2040 Long‐Term Regionally Significant Projects 2031 – 2040 Project Number
Project
Description
Jurisdiction
Project Cost (2014 $)
Year of Expenditure Cost
27
Riverside Drive Phase 3
Design and construct new connecting roadway Sherman to Sprague, along Erie ROW
City of Spokane
$6,000,000
$9,272,675
28
Latah Bridge
Improve capacity/rehabilitate
City of Spokane
$20,000,000
$30,908,918
29
Sullivan Rd. Bridge
Construct new bridge over Trent and BNSF railroad tracks
City of Spokane Valley
$13,300,000
$23,521,511
30 31 32 33
NSC ‐ I 90 North Access Connection US 195 ‐ Hatch Rd. I/C and Meadow NSC ‐ Collector Distributor System NSC ‐ Trent Ave. to Spokane River
Construct interchange and roadway for half of facility Corridor design, right of way and access control, construct Reconstruction I‐90 with C/D system Phase 2 Construct interchange and roadway for half of facility
WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT Subtotal
$187,000,000 $71,000,000 $230,000,000 $155,500,000 $682,800,000
$265,712,462 $102,353,373 $341,121,380 $233,857,422 $1,006,747,740
Appendix Policy Point 3 - A
Appendix PP3-A 2014 Existing Turning Movement Summary AM Peak Approach No
1 2 3 4 5
1.
Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Traffic Control
PHF
HV
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
TW
0.92
10%
84
3
57
0
0
0
0
210
230
260
273
0
TW
0.88
10%
0
0
0
174
1
193
79
204
0
0
363
60
AW
0.88
10%
78
5
1
5
3
99
1
179
6
81
68
73
TW
0.79
10%
0
28
1
68
15
0
1
0
52
0
0
0
TW
0.91
10%
1
3
11
90
2
23
6
267
123
64
329
0
S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming Peak Hour %HV=10%
2014 Existing Turning Movement Summary PM Peak Approach No.
1 2 3
4
5
1.
Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Traffic Control
PHF
%HV
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
TW
0.9
10%
94
0
102
0
0
0
0
180
237
189
360
0
TW
0.91
10%
0
0
0
172
1
227
61
221
0
0
383
136
AW
0.92
10%
98
4
5
3
5
122
1
116
4
77
195
79
TW
0.87
10%
0
32
3
72
22
0
3
0
77
0
0
0
TW
0.91
10%
0
0
9
215
4
68
9
266
168
51
292
0
S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming Peak Hour %HV=10%
2020 Base Conditions Turning Movement Summary AM Peak Approach No
1 2 3 4 5
1.
Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Traffic Control
PHF
%HV
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
TW
0.92
10%
152
3
88
0
0
0
0
239
230
307
437
0
TW
0.92
10%
0
0
0
280
1
247
86
310
0
0
468
92
AW
0.92
10%
83
5
1
5
13
122
1
187
6
150
85
183
TW
0.92
10%
0
30
1
76
17
110
1
0
55
0
0
0
TW
0.92
10%
1
3
11
211
0
31
0
475
358
90
449
0
S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming Peak Hour %HV=10%
2020 Base Conditions Turning Movement Summary PM Peak Approach No
Intersection
Traffic Control
PHF
%HV
Eastbound LT
1 2 3 4 5 1.
TH
Westbound RT
LT
TH
RT
Northbound LT
EB Ramp @ TW 0.92 10% 137 0 113 0 0 0 0 SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ TW 0.92 10% 0 0 0 239 1 322 93 SR902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ AW 0.92 10% 211 11 5 3 5 174 1 Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd TW 0.92 10% 0 35 3 82 24 0 3 @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake TW 0.92 10% 0 0 9 488 4 101 9 Rd S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming Peak Hour %HV=10%
Southbound
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
266
331
348
473
0
327
0
0
588
196
130
4
182
203
91
0
83
110
0
0
517
294
91
577
0
2040 Base Conditions Turning Movement Summary AM Peak Approach No
Intersection
Traffic Control
PHF
%HV
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
1
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
0.92
10%
239
3
137
0
0
0
0
294
195
354
486
0
2
WB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90
TW
0.92
10%
0
0
0
287
1
342
83
454
0
0
558
128
3
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
AW
0.92
10%
86
5
1
5
13
136
1
199
6
200
116
198
4
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
TW
0.92
10%
0
31
1
85
19
113
1
0
59
0
0
0
5
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
TW
0.92
10%
1
3
11
265
0
46
0
599
473
71
522
0
1.
S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming Peak Hour %HV=10%
2040 Base Conditions Turning Movement Summary PM Peak Approach Traffic Control
No
Intersection
1
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
0.92
2
WB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90
TW
3
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
4 5
1.
PHF
%HV
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
10.0%
191
0
122
0
0
0
0
313
253
434
488
0
0.92
10.0%
0
0
0
212
1
386
112
388
0
0
715
283
AW
0.92
10.0%
217
14
5
3
5
197
1
154
4
164
235
100
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
TW
0.92
10.0%
0
40
3
83
32
0
3
0
94
113
0
0
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
TW
0.92
10.0%
0
0
9
609
4
118
9
589
362
71
683
0
S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming Peak Hour %HV=10%
2020 Forecasting Traffic Volumes on I-90 Mainline and Ramps AM Peak Hour Location
Type
2020 Base Condition
2020 Alternative 2
2020 Alternative 3A
PM Peak Hour 2020 Alternative 3B
2020 Base Condition
2020 Alternative 2
2020 Alternative 3A
2020 Alternative 3B
I-90, WB I-90 WB offramp to SR 904 I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 WB onramp from SR 902 I-90 WB Under SR 902 I-90 WB offramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
Mainline
1400
1400
1400
1400
1951
1951
1951
1951
SR 904 Off Ramp
604
604
604
604
810
810
810
810
Mainline
1400
1400
1400
1400
1951
1951
1951
1951
Mainline
1220
1220
1216
1216
1697
1697
1693
1693
SR 902 On Ramp
180
180
184
184
286
286
290
290
Mainline
1220
1220
1216
1216
1697
1697
1693
1693
Mainline
1676
1676
1676
1676
2246
2246
2246
2246
SR 902 Off Ramp
456
456
460
460
548
548
552
552
Mainline
1676
1676
1676
1676
2246
2246
2246
2246
I-90, EB I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 EB offramp to SR 902 I-90 EB, Under SR 902 I-90 EB onramp from SR 902 I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Mainline
1706
1706
1706
1706
1366
1366
1366
1366
Mainline
1706
1706
1706
1706
1366
1366
1366
1366
SR 902 Off Ramp
233
237
237
237
251
255
255
255
Mainline
1473
1469
1469
1469
1115
1111
1111
1111
Mainline
1473
1469
1469
1469
1115
1111
1111
1111
SR 902 On Ramp
535
535
535
535
599
599
599
599
Mainline
2008
2008
2008
2008
1715
1715
1715
1715
2040 Forecasting Traffic Volumes on I-90 Mainline and Ramps AM Peak Hour Location
2040 Base Condition
2040 Alternative 2
Mainline
1566
1566
SR 904 Off Ramp
705
Mainline
2040 Alternative 3A
PM Peak Hour 2040 Alternative 3B
2040 Base Condition
2040 Alternative 2
2040 Alternative 3A
2040 Alternative 3B
1566
1566
2314
2314
2314
2314
705
705
705
996
996
996
996
1566
1566
1566
1566
2314
2314
2314
2314
Mainline
1359
1359
1355
1355
1940
1940
1936
1936
SR 902 On Ramp
208
208
212
212
404
404
408
408
Mainline
1359
1359
1355
1355
1940
1940
1936
1936
Mainline
2028
2028
2028
2028
2526
2526
2526
2526
SR 902 Off Ramp
669
669
673
673
585
585
589
589
Mainline
2028
2028
2028
2028
2526
2526
2526
2526
Type
I-90, WB I-90 WB offramp to SR 904 I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 WB onramp from SR 902 I-90 WB Under SR 902 I-90 WB offramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
I-90, EB I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 EB offramp to SR 902 I-90 EB, Under SR 902 I-90 EB onramp from SR 902 I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Mainline
2094
1706
1706
1706
1592
1592
1592
1592
Mainline
2094
1706
1706
1706
1592
1592
1592
1592
SR 902 Off Ramp
378
382
382
382
300
304
304
304
Mainline
1716
1712
1712
1712
1291
1287
1287
1287
Mainline
1716
1712
1712
1712
1291
1287
1287
1287
SR 902 On Ramp
563
535
535
535
764
764
764
764
Mainline
2279
2008
2008
2008
2056
2056
2056
2056
2020 Forecasting Traffic Turning Movements at Intersections AM Peak Hour Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90
WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
Control
Two Way
Two Way
All Way
2020 Alternative 2
2020 Alternative 3B
2020 Base Condition
2020 Alternative 2
2020 Alternative 3A
2020 Alternative 3B
1,456
1,461
1,461
1,461
1,668
1,673
1,673
1,673
152
152
152
152
137
137
137
137
EB-T
3
7
7
7
0
4
4
4
EB-R
88
88
88
88
113
113
113
113
2020 Base Condition
Overall EB-L
NB-T
239
239
239
239
266
266
266
266
NB-R
230
230
230
230
331
331
331
331
SB-L
307
307
307
307
348
348
348
348
SB-T
437
438
438
438
473
474
474
474
Overall
1,484
1,484
1,488
1,484
1,766
1,766
1,770
1,766 240
WB-L
280
281
281
281
239
240
240
WB-T
1
1
5
1
1
1
5
1
WB-R
247
246
246
246
322
321
321
321
NB-L
86
86
86
86
93
93
93
93
NB-T
310
310
310
310
327
327
327
327 588
SB-T
468
468
468
468
588
588
588
SB-R
92
92
92
92
196
196
196
196
Overall
841
843
843
843
1,020
1,022
1,022
1,022
EB-L
83
83
83
83
211
211
211
211
EB-T
5
5
5
5
11
11
11
11
EB-R
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
5
WB-L
5
5
5
5
3
3
3
3
WB-T
13
13
13
13
5
5
5
5
WB-R
122
122
122
122
174
174
174
174
NB-L
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
NB-T
187
187
187
187
130
130
130
130
NB-R
6
6
6
6
4
4
4
4
SB-L
150
150
150
150
182
182
182
182
SB-T
85
85
85
85
203
203
203
203
SB-R
183 290
185 292
185 292
185 292
91 340
93 342
93 342
93 342
Overall
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Two Way
Two Way
PM Peak Hour
2020 Alternative 3A
Movement
EB-L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
EB-T EB-R
30
30
30
30
35
35
35
35
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
WB-L
76
76
76
76
82
82
82
82 24
WB-T
17
17
17
17
24
24
24
WB-R
110
112
112
112
0
2
2
2
NB-L
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
NB-T
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NB-R
55
55
55
55
83
83
83
83
SB-L
0
0
0
0
110
110
110
110
SB-T
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SB-R
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Overall
1,629
1,629
1,629
1,629
2,090
2,090
2,090
2,090
EB-L
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
EB-T EB-R
3
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
11
11
11
11
9
9
9
9
WB-L
211
211
211
211
488
488
488
488
WB-T
0
0
0
0
4
4
4
4
WB-R
31
31
31
31
101
101
101
101
NB-L
0
0
0
0
9
9
9
9
NB-T
475
475
475
475
517
517
517
517
NB-R
358
358
358
358
294
294
294
294
SB-L
90
90
90
90
91
91
91
91
SB-T
449
449
449
449
577
577
577
577
SB-R
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2040 Forecasting Traffic Turning Movements at Intersections AM Peak Hour Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90
WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
Control
Two Way
Two Way
All Way
2040 Alternative 2
2040 Alternative 3B
2040 Base Condition
2040 Alternative 2
2040 Alternative 3A
2040 Alternative 3B
1,708
1,713
1,713
1,713
1,801
1,806
1,806
1,806
239
239
239
239
191
191
191
191
EB-T
3
7
7
7
0
4
4
4
EB-R
137
137
137
137
122
122
122
122
2040 Base Condition
Overall EB-L
NB-T
294
294
294
294
313
313
313
313
NB-R
195
195
195
195
253
253
253
253
SB-L
354
354
354
354
434
434
434
434
SB-T
486
487
487
487
488
489
489
489
Overall
1,853
1,853
1,857
1,853
2,097
2,097
2,101
2,097 213
WB-L
287
288
288
288
212
213
213
WB-T
1
1
5
1
1
1
5
1
WB-R
342
341
341
341
386
385
385
385
NB-L
83
83
83
83
112
112
112
112
NB-T
454
454
454
454
388
388
388
388
SB-T
558
558
558
558
715
715
715
715
SB-R
128
128
128
128
283
283
283
283
Overall
966
968
968
968
1,099
1,101
1,101
1,101
EB-L
86
86
86
86
217
217
217
217
EB-T
5
5
5
5
14
14
14
14
EB-R
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
5
WB-L
5
5
5
5
3
3
3
3
WB-T
13
13
13
13
5
5
5
5
WB-R
136
136
136
136
197
197
197
197
NB-L
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
NB-T
199
199
199
199
154
154
154
154
NB-R
6
6
6
6
4
4
4
4
SB-L
200
200
200
200
164
164
164
164
SB-T
116
116
116
116
235
235
235
235
SB-R
198 309
200 311
200 311
200 311
100 368
102 370
102 370
102 370
Overall
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Two Way
Two Way
PM Peak Hour
2040 Alternative 3A
Movement
EB-L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
EB-T EB-R
31
31
31
31
40
40
40
40
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
WB-L
85
85
85
85
83
83
83
83 32
WB-T
19
19
19
19
32
32
32
WB-R
113
115
115
115
0
2
2
2
NB-L
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
NB-T
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NB-R
59
59
59
59
94
94
94
94
SB-L
0
0
0
0
113
113
113
113
SB-T
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SB-R
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Overall
1,991
1,991
1,991
1,991
2,454
2,454
2,454
2,454 0
EB-L
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
EB-T EB-R
3
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
11
11
11
11
9
9
9
9 609
WB-L
265
265
265
265
609
609
609
WB-T
0
0
0
0
4
4
4
4
WB-R
46
46
46
46
118
118
118
118
NB-L
0
0
0
0
9
9
9
9
NB-T
599
599
599
599
589
589
589
589
NB-R
473
473
473
473
362
362
362
362
SB-L
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
SB-T
522
522
522
522
683
683
683
683
SB-R
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Appendix Policy Point 4 - A
Memorandum To:
Don Skillingstad
From:
Steve Lewis/Mark Burrus
CC:
File
Subject:
Alternatives Review & Selection - UPDATED
Date:
January 12, 2015
This memo was updated to reflect the results of the January 8, 2015 Technical Committee Meeting. To recap: Alternative 1 is what we are referring to as the “no build” option for the IJR. It includes the park & ride lot, but no modifications to the Interstate System for high capacity transit. Alternative 2 includes a west bound center median flyer stop and an east bound off ramp transit stop, as well as the park & ride lot from the “no build” option. Alternative 3A replaces the west bound center median flyer stop with a west bound on-ramp transit stop. Alternative 3B replaces the west bound center median flyer stop with a west bound shoulder flyer stop. Each of the four alternatives are shown below for reference.
Alternative 1
Alternative 2 1
Alternative 3B
Alternative 3A
Each of the Measures of Effectiveness was reviewed with the Technical Committee at the November 6th meeting (as well as with the Core Stakeholder Group later in the day) and to which STA has added one additional measure, System Operating Cost. The Measures of Effectiveness are further described below, and now include in total: •
Travel Time
•
Compatibility with Local Plans
•
Safety
•
Operations & Maintenance Cost
•
Pedestrian Travel Distance
•
System Operations Cost
•
Deviations
•
Construction Cost
•
Environmental Impacts
Alternatives Scoring Process Prior to the Technical Committee Meeting, STA and Lochner evaluated and ranked the alternatives based on STA’s goal of expanding connectivity to the West Plains communities and improving travel times to and from Cheney and Eastern Washington University by providing improved high quality, higher performance and cost-effective transit services. The results of the ranking by this method are shown in Method 1 of the attached matrix. During the Technical Committee Meeting, the team discussed other ways to rank the alternatives that might be more impartial. The first method proposed was a tiered system. In this way, the measures were not ranked individually, but instead fall into three distinct tiers. The results of the ranking by this method are shown in Method 2 of the attached matrix. A third method was suggested by Barb De Ste Croix, WSDOT HQ. This method, it was agreed by the team was the most impartial. Using this method, the team first ranked the measures of effectiveness by comparing each measure to the others to determine which was more important. The results provided the weighting to be used in the actual scoring analysis. The team then worked through the scoring analysis to 2
rank the alternatives. The results of the ranking by this method are shown in Method 3 of the attached matrix. Results All 3 scoring methods yielded similar results as shown in the attached matrix. Alternative 3B scored the lowest with the No Build and Alternative 3A scoring similarly, and Alternative 2 scoring the highest. Based on the results of this analysis Alternative 2 has been selected as the preferred alternative and will move forward in conceptual design.
3
West Plains Transit Center Measures of Effectiveness
Travel Time The measure of effectiveness from travel time is taken from Policy Point 3, Table 3.8: 2020 and 2040 Transit Travel time (in minutes). The values shown in the table were converted to seconds and summed to obtain one set of values for each direction of travel along I-90. The travel times evaluated do not include the future WSDOT roundabouts project.
Location
Type
Without WSDOT Roundabouts
AM PM
Without WSDOT Roundabouts
AM PM
No Build I-90, WB 2451 2709 I-90, EB 3254 3958
Total
12372 1
2020+2040 Alternative Alternative 2 3A
Alternative 3B
772 794
1629 1826
772 794
2602 3241
2602 3241
2602 3241
7409
9298
7409
4
3
4
Delta 4963
Best (4)
7400
8641
Increment 1241
Good (3)
8642
9883
Neutral (2)
9884
11124
Poor (1)
11125
12366
4
Safety The collision analysis, as summarized in Policy Point 3, indicates that the build alternatives have minor impact on the safety of the freeway and the adjacent local street system in the study area, as compared to base conditions in 2040. This is because the build alternatives involve only a few express buses accessing the West Plains Transit Center during the peak hours. Policy Point 3, Table 3.19: 2020 and 2040 ISATe Collision Analysis for Build Alternatives indicates that there is no change in the number of collisions between the base condition and the build alternatives; therefore all alternatives are scored equally as shown below.
Alternative Score
No Build 1 2
Delta 0 Increment 10
5
Center 2 2
On Ramp 3A 2
Shoulder of WB 3B 2
Best (4)
5.0
15.0
Good (3)
16.0
26.0
Neutral (2)
27.0
37.0
Poor (1)
38.0
48.0
Pedestrian Travel Distance The Pedestrian Travel Distance Measure of Effectiveness is based on the distance a pedestrian must travel from the time they enter the pedestrian bridge until they reach the pedestrian platform at the flyer stop for each of the build alternatives. The pedestrian bridge configuration is that used in the concept drawing and as shown in the alternatives presented in Policy Point 2.
Alternative Pedestrian Travel Distance (ft) Score
No Build 1 0 4
Delta 1214 Increment 304
6
Center 2 754 2
On Ramp 3A 1214 1
Shoulder of WB 3B 979 1
Best (4)
0
304
Good (3)
305
608
Neutral (2)
609
913
Poor (1)
914
1217
Deviations Needed to Implement Improvements This measure quantifies the number of deviations that are anticipated to be required for each of the alternatives. The analysis, based on conceptual level design using aerial photography, indicates two of the alternatives, 2 and 3B, may require deviations. Alternative 2 Alternative 2 may require a shoulder width deviation. Design standard for a non-separated HOV lane is 12 feet in a tangent with minimum combined shoulder width of 12 feet, giving a total roadway width of 24 feet. Separating the HOV lane from the general purpose lane would require barrier on the right side which adds an additional 2 feet of width plus 2 feet of shy distance on each side for a total of 30 feet. Measuring using aerial photography, there appears to be approximately 28 feet of available width between the center pier and the inside edge of shoulder. Per the as-built plans, Four Lakes to Geiger Field, the width available between the centerline of the pier and the edge of pavement is 34 feet. Subtracting half the 3 foot pier diameter, (1.5 feet) minus the barrier including 2 feet for deflection leaves 28.5 feet. Alternative 3B Using the as-built drawing from the Four Lakes to Geiger Field project, an analysis was done to evaluate the feasibility of constructing a transit only lane between the existing bridge pier and abutment on the north side of westbound I-90. The analysis showed the option is feasible, however a deviation will likely be required for shoulder width (horizontal clearance) as well as vertical clearance. Horizontal clearance required is 24 feet and there is 20 feet available. Vertical clearance, based on WSDOT Design Manual Exhibit 720-1, is >16 feet and there is 13.5 feet available. See Figure 1 below. Figure 1
Alternative Shoulder Width Vertical Clearance Total Score Legend:
No Build 1 0 0 0 4
Center 2 1 0 1 3
On Ramp 3A 0 0 0 4
Shoulder of WB 3B 1 1 2 2
Best (4)
Good (3)
Neutral (2)
Poor (1)
7
Environmental Impacts This measure looks at impacts to sensitive areas, such as wetlands and streams. No environmental field work has been completed at this stage in the IJR process, however historical data obtained for the interchange area has identified wetlands along the eastbound off-ramp, and adjacent to the east bound on-ramp and the west bound offramp. The area of impacts to these previously identified wetlands was estimated and scored as shown below. Wetland impacts along the eastbound off-ramp are the same for all alternatives. Should additional environmental impacts be identified as design progresses, this measure will need to be reevaluated. No Build 1
Alternative Wetland A - EB off ramp Wetland B - EB on ramp Wetland C - WB off ramp
0 0 0 0.00 4
Total Score
Center On Ramp 2 3A Impact area in acres 0.23 0.23 0 0 0 0 0.23 0.23 4 4 Best (4) Good (3) Neutral (2) Poor (1)
Delta 0.34 Increment 0.09
8
0.23 0.33 0.42 0.52
Shoulder of WB 3B 0.23 0.34 0 0.57 1 0.32 0.41 0.51 0.60
Compatibility with Local Plans Policy Point 5 (draft) of the IJR discusses the compatibility of the alternatives with local plans including Connect Spokane, WSDOT’s I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvement Project, Horizon 2040 the Washington State Transportation Plan and the County. Of these, the I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvement project has the most impact on future operations.
Alternative Horizon 2040 Connect Spokane WSDOT I-90/SR 902 IC WA State Trans. Plan Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Total Score
No Build
Center
On Ramp
1 0 0 1 1 1 3 2
2 1 1 1 1 1 5 4
3A 1 1 1 1 1 5 4
Delta 2 Increment 0.5
9
Shoulder of WB 3B 1 1 1 1 1 5 4
Best (4)
5.3
4.8
Good (3)
4.7
4.2
Neutral (2)
4.1
3.6
Poor (1)
3.5
3.0
Operations and Maintenance Cost Evaluating Operations and Maintenance (O&M) is based on two main criteria: area of new pavement and area of new (pedestrian) bridge to be maintained. For this alternative analysis, it was assumed that all other costs related to O&M would be relatively equivalent. Costs such as snow removal would be a function of new pavement and are not broken out separately.
Alternative Area of New Pavement (sf) Area of Ped Bridge (sf) Score
No Build 1 22959 0 17219 4
Center 2 99075
On Ramp 3A 118851
Shoulder of WB 3B 197973
7540 76191 3
12140 92173 2
9790 150927 1
Best (4)
17219
50646
Good (3)
50647
84074
Neutral (2)
84075
117502
Poor (1)
117503
150930
Weighted Average ((0.75xPavement) + (0.25xStructure))
Delta 133708 Increment 33427
10
Systems Operations Cost Systems operations cost impacts are based upon a number of factors including the cost per hour of service, annual service hours, vehicle purchase costs, vehicle maintenance costs, passenger impact and passenger delay. The relative costs for flyer stops vs no flyer stops was analyzed. If no flyer stops are constructed, the system will require additional vehicles and staff, an additional route, and result in additional passenger delay. The construction of flyer stops will not require additional systems costs.
Alternative System Impact Passenger Impact Score Legend:
No Build 1 1 1 1
Center 2 4 4 4
On Ramp 3A 4 3 3
Shoulder of WB 3B 4 4 4
Best (4)
Good (3)
Neutral (2)
Poor (1)
11
Construction Cost The project is early in the conceptual design phase so complete cost estimates have not yet been developed. To determine differences in costs between the build alternatives, quantities for the more costly elements were estimated. Using WSDOT’s Unit Bid Analysis tool, equal unit bid prices were determined and summed to develop order of magnitude costs.
Alternative Pedestrian Bridge Structure Area (sf) Pedestrian Platform (sf) Area of New Pavement (sf) HMA (tons) Stem Wall (sf) Raised Median (LS) Total
Unit Cost
1_ No Build Quantity Price
2_Center Quantity Price
3A_On Ramp Quantity Price
3B_Shldr of WB Quantity Price
$
300
0
$
-
7540
$ 2,262,000
12140
$ 3,642,000
9790
$ 2,937,000
$
150
0
$
-
1108
$
166,200
1108
$
166,200
1108
$
166,200
0
$
-
99075
$
-
118851
$
-
197973
$
-
90 75
0 0
$ $
-
7376 0
$ $
663,803 -
8848 0
$ $
796,302 -
14738 1110
$ 1,326,419 $ 83,250
$370,000
0
$
-
1
$
370,000
0
$
-
$ 4
-
$ $
$ 3,462,003
$ 4,610,000 $ 1,200,000
Good (3)
12
1 Best Good Neutral Poor
Neutral (2)
-
$ 4,512,869
1
Best (4)
$
$ 4,604,502
2
Delta Increment
Legend:
0
0 1,210,000 2,420,000 3,630,000
Poor (1)
1,200,000 2,410,000 3,620,000 4,830,000
Attachment METHOD 1 - STA/LOCHNER SCORING MEASURE
BASE SCALE
WEIGHTED SCALE
WEIGHT
NB
2
3A
3B
Travel Time
9
1
4
3
Safety
8
2
2
2
Pedestrian Travel Distance
7
4
2
Deviations
6
4
Environmental Impacts
5
Compatibility with Local Plans
4
Operations and Maintenance Cost Systems Operations Cost Construction Cost
NB
2
3A
3B
Ranking
Score
Alternative
4
9
36
27
36
2
123.0
No Build
2
16
16
16
16
1
139.0
ALT 2
1
1
28
14
7
7
2
123.0
ALT 3A
3
4
2
24
18
24
12
3
107.0
ALT 3B
4
4
4
1
20
20
20
5
2
4
4
4
8
16
16
16
3
4
3
2
2
12
9
6
6
2
1
4
3
4
2
8
6
8
1
4
2
1
1
4
2
1
1
TOTAL
26
28
24
21
123
139
123
107
METHOD 2 - TIERED SCORING MEASURE
BASE SCALE
WEIGHTED SCALE
WEIGHT
NB
2
3A
3B
NB
2
3A
3B
Ranking
Score
Alternative
Travel Time
9
1
4
3
4
9
36
27
36
2
122.0
No Build
Safety
9
2
2
2
2
18
18
18
18
1
136.0
ALT 2
Pedestrian Travel Distance
9
4
2
1
1
36
18
9
9
3
120.0
ALT 3A
Deviations
5
4
3
4
2
20
15
20
10
4
105.0
ALT 3B
Environmental Impacts
5
4
4
4
1
20
20
20
5
Compatibility with Local Plans
5
2
4
4
4
10
20
20
20
Operations and Maintenance Cost
1
4
3
2
2
4
3
2
2
Systems Operations Cost
1
1
4
3
4
1
4
3
4
Construction Cost
1
4
2
1
1
4
2
1
1
TOTAL
26
28
24
21
122
136
120
105
METHOD 3 - TECHNICAL COMMITTEE SCORING
Deviations
Environmental Impacts
Compatibility with Local Plans
Operations and Maintenance Cost
Systems Operations Cost
Construction Cost
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
x
b
a
a
a
a
a
a/h
a
7.5
17%
x
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
9
20%
ALT 2
4
2
2
3
4
4
3
x
c/d
c/e
c
g
h
c/i
3.5
8%
ALT 3A
3
2
1
4
4
4
2
x
e
d/f
g
h
i
2
4%
ALT 3B
4
2
1
2
1
4
1
4
x
e
e/g
e
e
6
13%
x
g
h
i
1.5
3%
Ranking
Score
Alternative
x
h
i
4.5
10%
2
117.0
No Build
x
h
6.5
14%
1
139.5
ALT 2
x
4.5
10%
3
115.0
ALT 3A
45
100%
4
102.5
ALT 3B
13
Pedestrian Travel Distance
b
No Build
Safety
a
Alternative
Travel Time
Percentage of Total
TOTAL
TOTAL
i Construction Cost
Construction Cost
h Systems Operations Cost
Systems Operations Cost
Operations and Maintenance g Cost
Operations and Maintenance Cost
f Compatibility with Local Plans
Compatibility with Local Plans
e Environmental Impacts
Environmental Impacts
d Deviations
Deviations
c Pedestrian Travel Distance
Pedestrian Travel Distance
b Safety
Safety
a Travel Time
SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES (4=Best, 3=Good, 2=Neutral, 1=Poor)
Travel Time
MEASURE
CRITERIA WEIGHTING
7.5
9
3.5
2
6
1.5
4.5
6.5
4.5
1
2
4
4
4
2
4
1
4
117
4
2
139.5
3
1
115
1
102.5
SCORE
Appendix Policy Point 4 - B
Appendix PP4-B LEGEND IMPROVEMENTS
M ATCH LI NE SHEET 2
PROPERTY / ROW LINES
1/29/2015
0 WB 9 I
B 0E 9 I
E L 5 MI . 0
EX I T
272
I : \BLV\PRJ\000009715\8_ Desi gn\W orki ng\rhoward\9715- Exhi bi t- Al t_ 2. dgn
EX I T 902
272
W ES T 902
M edical Lake 1/2 MILE
W ES T
M edical Lake
West Plains Transit Center
50
CONCEPTUAL NO.
DATE
BY
APPR.
0
50
100
SCALE IN FEET
REVISIONS
DRAWING NUMBER DESIGNED BY
DATE
DRAWN BY
DATE
CHECKED BY
DATE
WEST PLAINS TRANSIT
SN01
ALTERNATIVE 2 APPROVED BY
FILENAME:
DATE
Z-tblk.dwg
SHT
OF
00
LEGEND IMPROVEMENTS
PROPERTY / ROW LINES
MATCH LI NE SHEET 3
I 9 0E B
SR 902
MATCH LI NE SHEET 1
1/29/2015
I 9 0 WB
SH EE T
4
ONL Y
BUS
I : \BLV\PRJ\000009715\8_ Desi gn\W orki ng\rhoward\9715- Exhi bi t- Al t_ 2. dgn
35
ONLY
272 AT CH
BUSES
M
EX I T
LI NE
EXI T
M PH
50
CONCEPTUAL NO.
DATE
BY
APPR.
0
50
100
SCALE IN FEET
REVISIONS
DRAWING NUMBER DESIGNED BY
DATE
DRAWN BY
DATE
CHECKED BY
DATE
APPROVED BY
DATE
FILENAME:
Z-tblk.dwg
WEST PLAINS TRANSIT ALTERNATIVE 2
SN02 SHT
OF
00
LEGEND IMPROVEMENTS
PROPERTY / ROW LINES
EX I T
902
272
W ES T
M edical Lake
EX I T
902
272
W ES T
M edical Lake 1/2 MILE
BUS
ONL Y
MATCH LI NE SHEET 2
1/29/2015
West Plains Transit Center
I 9 0W B
EXI T
0 . 5M I L E
25 M PH
I 9 0E B
I : \BLV\PRJ\000009715\8_ Desi gn\W orki ng\rhoward\9715- Exhi bi t- Al t_ 2. dgn
RESTRICTED
EXIT BUSES ONLY
BUSES ONLY
50
CONCEPTUAL NO.
DATE
BY
APPR.
0
50
100
SCALE IN FEET
REVISIONS
DRAWING NUMBER DESIGNED BY
DATE
DRAWN BY
DATE
CHECKED BY
DATE
WEST PLAINS TRANSIT APPROVED BY
FILENAME:
SN03
ALTERNATIVE 2
DATE
Z-tblk.dwg
SHT
OF
00
H TC MA
NE I L
T EE SH
LEGEND 2 IMPROVEMENTS
PROPERTY / ROW LINES
TRANSIT CENTER LAYOUT PROVIDED FOR INFORMATION ONLY AND IS NOT PART OF THE IJR
W
A E R O
R D
I : \BLV\PRJ\000009715\8_ Desi gn\W orki ng\rhoward\9715- Exhi bi t- Al t_ 2. dgn
W ESTBOW
BLVD
1/29/2015
HA Y F ORD RD
50
CONCEPTUAL NO.
DATE
BY
APPR.
0
50
100
SCALE IN FEET
REVISIONS
DRAWING NUMBER DESIGNED BY
DATE
DRAWN BY
DATE
CHECKED BY
DATE
WEST PLAINS TRANSIT APPROVED BY
FILENAME:
SN04
ALTERNATIVE 2
DATE
Z-tblk.dwg
SHT
OF
00
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
WSDOT HQ Development Services & Access Manager Concurrence By: ________________________________________, P.E. Barb De Ste. Croix – Development Services & Access Manager
Date: ______________________________________, 2015
WSDOT Approval By: ________________________________________, P.E. Scott Zeller – Assistant State Design Engineer
Date: ______________________________________, 2015
FHWA Approval By: ________________________________________ Don Petersen – FHWA Safety & Design Engineer
Date: ______________________________________, 2015
Final | Interchange Justification Report
Table of Contents Charter Agreement ................................................................................................................................................................ CA - 1 Methods and Assumptions ................................................................................................................................................. M&A - 1 Technical Committee Acceptance ............................................................................................................................... M&A - 1 Introduction and Project Description ............................................................................................................................ M&A - 2 Analysis Years/Periods................................................................................................................................................ M&A - 4 Project and Study Areas .............................................................................................................................................. M&A - 4 Traffic Operations Analysis.......................................................................................................................................... M&A - 4 Travel Forecast ........................................................................................................................................................... M&A - 5 Safety Issues ............................................................................................................................................................... M&A - 5 Selection of Measures of Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................... M&A - 5 Deviations/Justifications .............................................................................................................................................. M&A - 5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................... M&A - 6 Purpose and Need ............................................................................................................................................................... P&N - 1 Project Description ....................................................................................................................................................... P&N - 1 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................................................ P&N - 1 Need (Problem Definition) ............................................................................................................................................ P&N - 1 Goals and Objectives ................................................................................................................................................... P&N - 2 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... P&N - 2 Policy Point 1: Need for the Access Point Revision ............................................................................................................. PP1 - 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... PP1 - 1 Existing and Future Needs ........................................................................................................................................... PP1 - 4 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... PP1 - 7 Policy Point 2: Reasonable Alternatives .............................................................................................................................. PP2 - 1 Transportation System Management ........................................................................................................................... PP2 - 1 Improvement Alternatives ............................................................................................................................................. PP2 - 1 Future WSDOT Improvements ..................................................................................................................................... PP2 - 2 Policy Point 3: Operational and Collision Analysis............................................................................................................... PP3 - 1 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... PP3 - 1
TOC - 1
Traffic Operational Analysis – Base Conditions............................................................................................................ PP3 - 2 Traffic Operational Analysis – Build Alternatives .......................................................................................................... PP3 - 7 Collision Analysis – Base Conditions ......................................................................................................................... PP3 - 13 Collision Analysis – Build Alternatives ........................................................................................................................ PP3 - 15 Policy Point 4: Access Connections and Design ................................................................................................................. PP4 - 1 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... PP4 - 1 Conceptual Layout and Signing Plans .......................................................................................................................... PP4 - 1 Present and Future Interchange Spacing ..................................................................................................................... PP4 - 1 Policy Point 5: Land Use and Transportation Plans............................................................................................................. PP5 - 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... PP5 - 1 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... PP5 - 2 Policy Point 6: Future Interchanges ..................................................................................................................................... PP6 - 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... PP6 - 1 Future WSDOT Improvements ..................................................................................................................................... PP6 - 1 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................... PP6 - 1 Policy Point 7: Coordination................................................................................................................................................. PP7 - 1 Funding ........................................................................................................................................................................ PP7 - 1 Project Coordination ..................................................................................................................................................... PP7 - 1 Policy Point 8: Environmental Process ................................................................................................................................ PP8 - 1 Environmental Approval and Permitting Process ......................................................................................................... PP8 - 1
Appendices Appendix Policy Point 1 – A: Horizon 2040 Short-Term Regionally Significant Projects 2014 – 2040 Appendix Policy Point 3 – A: Base Conditions Traffic Volumes Appendix Policy Point 4 – A: Alternative Review and Selection Technical Memorandum Appendix Policy Point 4 – B: Preferred Alternative Plan Sheets
TOC - 2
Final | Interchange Justification Report
DRAFT
2. Introduction and Project Description The Spokane Transit Authority (STA) West Plains Transit Center project is located near Exit 272 along I-90 in the West Plains area of Spokane County. For the purposes of this report, the West Plains area is generally defined as the area west of the City of Spokane at Exit 277B (Hwy 2) which includes the cities of Airway Heights, Medical Lake, Cheney and the Four Lakes community and the areas served by those cities, as well as Fairchild Air Force Base and Spokane International Airport. See Figure 1. The transit center will be an important element of the future High Performance Transit (HPT) Network providing service throughout the West Plains. In early 2012, conceptual studies for the West Plains Transit Center were started. As a result of these studies, preliminary concepts and construction cost opinions were developed. After meeting with local agencies, these concepts and cost opinions were updated in March, 2013. Under the current conceptual design, the West Plains Transit Center will feature three passenger loading platforms and a park and ride lot with at least 100 parking stalls. The main loading platform will feature at least three bus bays to accommodate current and future service growth. Another loading platform will be adjacent to the eastbound off-ramp and accommodate mainline transit service along I-90. The remaining loading platform will serve westbound buses along I-90 and be connected to the rest of the transit center by a pedestrian bridge. Other features will include a transit-only flyer stop, transit lanes as needed, landscaping, lighting, bicycle parking, passenger shelters, and intelligent transportation systems (ITS). Architectural treatments and design features will also be incorporated into the project.
Purpose of the Project The purpose of the West Plains Transit Center is to expand connectivity to the West Plains communities and improve travel times to and from the City of Cheney and Eastern Washington University by providing improved high quality, higher performance and cost effective transit services that will address mobility needs for an expanding population and employment base west of Spokane. Multi-modal transportation services will be enhanced through: • • • •
Improving connectivity between cities and to the West Plains area; Providing easy and fast connections to HPT service along the I-90 corridor; Improving transit access to residential and employment areas adjacent to Exit 272 by providing convenient transfers between local and express bus services; and Reducing congestion by providing an attractive alternative for single occupant vehicle (SOV) users.
As part of this project, an Interchange Justification Report (IJR) will be completed to determine the preferred solution for the West Plains Transit Center project, in cooperation with FHWA, WSDOT, SRTC, Spokane County, and the Spokane International Airport. The results of the IJR will enable the project stakeholders to assess options and opportunities to improve the transportation system within the project area.
Project Leads and Proponents • • • • • • •
Spokane Transit Authority Federal Transit Administration Federal Highway Administration Washington State Department of Transportation Spokane Regional Transportation Council Spokane County Spokane International Airport
Environmental Document Types At this time, we anticipate a NEPA Documented Categorical Exclusion (and SEPA Checklist).
CA-3
Level of Documentation The proposed improvement options will include revisions to the existing eastbound off-ramp configuration, a center median westbound bus-only flyer stop or a westbound north side flyer stop with changes to the existing westbound on-ramp configuration. As required by WSDOT and FHWA, eight specific policy points will be addressed in the IJR. These are: •
Policy Point 1 documents the need for the access point revision. STA is embarking on a process of improving multimodal transportation services and developing a HPT Network. Policy Point 1 will document the need for access revisions in order to achieve the desired transit level of service to achieve that purpose.
•
Policy Point 2 provides a discussion of the reasonable alternatives evaluated. Building on previously completed studies, they will include: o
The do-nothing alternative which will include providing all transit service at the park and ride lot;
o
A center median option; and
o
A north side lane option.
•
Policy Point 3 includes the Operational & Collision Analysis. For this IJR, the only change in traffic is bus access at the Medical Lake Interchange with no changes at the upstream and downstream interchanges. As a result, this analysis will focus on either the weave or merge operations along I-90 and bus movements through the ramp terminals at the Medical Lake Interchange; depending on the preferred alternative.
•
Policy Point 4 discusses access connections and design. This policy point will include evaluation of limited improvements for bus only access to a transit stop along the main line, connected to a park and ride lot via a pedestrian bridge. Local street access will not be changed as part of this project; although there will be a “forward compatibility” analysis with WSDOT plans for future interchange improvements (at this time these appear to be limited to roundabouts at the ramp terminals).
•
Policy Point 5 addresses compatibility with land use and transportation plans.
•
Policy Point 6 reviews compatibility with the comprehensive transportation network plan and anticipated new access points.
•
Policy Point 7 deals with coordinating projects and actions programmed for funding.
•
Policy Point 8 includes a brief summary of the environmental process.
3. Core Stakeholder Group The Core Stakeholder Group is composed of representatives from the Spokane Transit Authority, Spokane County, City of Cheney, the Spokane International Airport, WSDOT, FHWA, West Plains Chamber of Commerce, and the Spokane Regional Transportation Council. The Core Stakeholder Group is an advisory group and will provide interagency oversight during the design phase of the West Plains Transit Center project. The Core Stakeholder Group will: •
Meet periodically for project briefings.
•
Serve as a sounding board for management of emerging issues and opportunities.
•
Provide overall policy input and insight regarding issues affecting the project.
•
Identify opportunities for partnerships between WSDOT and local, state, tribal and federal jurisdictions that result in an improved project.
•
Assist in conflict resolution within the Technical Committee, if needed.
•
Review preferred alternatives identified by project team members with input from the Technical Committee.
•
Confirm recommendations for priority project implementation following preparation of IJR.
CA-4
FINAL | hwlochner.com
DRAFT
Core Stakeholder Group Goal Provide executive level support for the project and identified solutions. Foster community support through communication of project goals, progress and ultimately identified solutions with fellow elected officials, agency administration representatives, and the public.
Core Stakeholder Group Roles & Responsibilities •
Each agency may provide one primary and one or more alternate representative(s) to the committee. If a primary participant is not able to attend a committee meeting, a fully briefed alternate will take her/his place.
•
All committee members will help identify project risks and assist in identifying strategies for addressing project risks.
•
Inform the WSDOT, Spokane Transit Authority and consultant project team regarding strategic partnership opportunities as they emerge.
•
Review project deliverables and/or project summary information when requested to do so. These reviews will focus on understanding the options that have been considered by the Technical Committee and the context behind selection of the preferred alternatives.
Primary Core Stakeholder Group Member / Alternate Al French / ______________________________ Tom Trulove / ____________________________ Larry Krauter / Matt Breen Kathleen Schreiber / _______________________ Don Petersen / ____________________________ Scott Zeller / ______________________________ Keith Metcalf / Mike Frucci Kevin Wallace / ____________________________ John Witmer / ____________________________ Steve Saxton / ____________________________ E. Susan Meyer / ___________________________
Affiliation/Agency Spokane County City of Cheney Spokane International Airport West Plains Chamber of Commerce FHWA WSDOT – Olympia Headquarters WSDOT – Eastern Region Spokane Regional Transportation Council FTA FTA Spokane Transit Authority
4. Technical Committee The Technical Committee is composed of technical staff from the Spokane Transit Authority, Spokane County, the Spokane Regional Transportation Council, WSDOT, FHWA, and the Spokane International Airport. From time to time additional agencies may assist or participate with the team on an as-needed basis. The Technical Committee will provide an interagency advisory role during the West Plains Transit Center IJR process. The Technical Committee will: •
Review and help refine the draft purpose and need statement for the project.
•
Assist in identification of design options consistent with the project’s purpose and need.
•
Help review design options and provide input into which options fit best with the local context.
•
Assist in identification of mitigation measures to reduce adverse project effects, and identify mitigation measures that are locally preferred.
•
Assist in the review of relevant project discipline reports and provide timely feedback on such.
•
Identify opportunities for partnerships between WSDOT, local, state, tribal and federal jurisdictions that result in an improved project. CA-5
Technical Committee Goal: Foster excellent project design by proactively involving affected stakeholders and jurisdictions. By bringing together individuals from different agencies early in the project, stakeholders expect to work collaboratively to address member organization concerns, and move quickly through the alternatives analysis, IJR, and NEPA/SEPA documentation process.
Technical Committee Roles & Responsibilities •
Participating agencies may provide multiple participants on the Technical Committee. Each agency may provide one primary and one or more alternate representative(s) to the team. If a primary participant is not able to attend a Technical Committee meeting, a fully briefed alternate will take her/his place.
•
All team members will work proactively to identify project risks and assist in identifying management strategies for project risks.
•
Inform the WSDOT, the Spokane Transit Authority and consultant project team regarding strategic partnership opportunities as they emerge.
•
Conduct reviews of project designs and documentation when requested to do so. These reviews will focus on identifying issues early with an emphasis on identifying design challenges.
•
Team members agree to work to resolve issues quickly and cost effectively.
•
Team members will actively inform and seek guidance from decision makers at their respective agency.
Primary Technical Committee Member / Alternate
Affiliation
Roy Siegel / _________________________________________
FHWA
Mike Frucci / Glenn Wagemann
WSDOT – Eastern Region
Glenn Wagemann (alternate) / __________________________
WSDOT – Eastern Region
Barb De Ste Croix / ___________________________________
WSDOT – Olympia Headquarters
Ryan Stewart / _______________________________________
Spokane Regional Transportation Council
Barry Greene / _______________________________________
Spokane County
Lisa Corcoran/_______________________________________
Spokane International Airport
Karl Otterstrom / _____________________________________
Spokane Transit Authority
Don Skillingstad / _____________________________________
Spokane Transit Authority
Technical Committee Operating Guidelines The Technical Committee will follow these guidelines to promote effective meetings and efficient completion of project tasks: •
All team members will participate fully, will have the authority to represent their organization, and will keep their respective organization leaders informed of project progress.
•
All team members will review pertinent project materials on a timely basis and provide timely feedback.
•
Members will come to meetings prepared to discuss items on the agenda.
•
Team members will honor one another by communicating honestly and respectfully. Members will give everyone an opportunity to speak.
•
Team members will keep their role and agency mission in mind when discussing project issues.
CA-6
FINAL | hwlochner.com
DRAFT •
Team members will resolve issues within their power to solve and re-direct those issues that cannot be solved in a timely manner. If issue resolution is necessary, team members will strive to follow the conflict resolution process identified in this Charter.
•
Meetings will begin and end at the scheduled times. Participants that arrive late will catch up on what was missed during breaks or as other opportunities allow.
•
Technical sub-groups may be formed to work on specialty issues specific to particular project aspects or of particular importance to specific areas/agencies.
•
The project team depends on consistent parameters for project design. Once project decisions are made the Technical Committee will work to honor those decisions and avoid reopening issues that have already been resolved or decided. Such decisions will be documented by the consultant team in technical memoranda and distributed to the group.
5. Project Participants/Alternates If a Core Stakeholder Group or Technical Committee member can no longer participate in the project, they will recommend a replacement to the Spokane Transit Authority. The departing member will fully brief their replacement prior to the replacement’s first meeting.
6. Schedule and Key Milestones See Attachment A
7. Key Meeting Dates See Attachment B
8. Decision Making Throughout the project there will be points at which decisions need to be made. WSDOT, the Spokane Transit Authority and the consultant team will strive to communicate with the Core Stakeholder Group and Technical Committee regarding which decisions are within each Committee’s realm and which decisions will be made by the WSDOT and Spokane Transit Authority with input from each Committee Member.
Decision Making Styles Autocratic: At times WSDOT and Spokane Transit Authority (as lead agency), will make decisions and report those to the Core Stakeholder Group and Technical Committee. Group: The project manager will bring issues to the group for discussion and analysis at Committee meetings. WSDOT and the Spokane Transit Authority, with Consultant Team assistance, will make these decisions based on input from the Technical Committee and/or Core Stakeholder Group. FHWA: As a federal facility, FHWA reserves the right to overrule decisions made at the local level.
9. Conflict Identification & Resolution The Core Stakeholder Group and Technical Committee members will work to resolve conflicts respectfully and when making group decisions will strive for consensus. If consensus cannot be achieved and conflict results, the involved parties will meet together, separate from the group to resolve the conflict on their own. If consensus still cannot be reached, WSDOT, the Spokane Transit Authority and the consultant team have the authority to choose the solution most consistent with the project goals. CA-7
10. Late in Process Changes In the course of any project, ideas may be put forth that are contrary to or different from previously agreed upon decisions but which may nonetheless, result in a significant improvement to the final outcome of this IJR. In those cases, depending on at what level the idea originates, the Technical Committee or Core Stakeholder Group will evaluate the idea and evaluate the benefits of the idea against impacts to: •
Scope, schedule and cost of the IJR, including resolution of who will pay for additional impacts if any;
•
Scope, schedule and cost of the preferred alternative; and
•
Indirect impacts, such as delays to other project schedules that directly relate to the outcome of this process.
When a change is suggested, there may be a three-level decision making process, depending on the relative impact of the suggested change, as follows: 1. In consultation with the Consultant’s Project Manager, Karl Otterstrom, Don Skillingstad, Mike Frucci and Roy Siegel will meet to determine if the merits of the potential change outweigh the associated impacts to scope, schedule and/or budget (all three agencies must be represented in person or by telephone for a determination to be rendered); 2. If it is agreed the potential change has merit, necessary additional evaluations will be completed and submitted to the Technical Committee for consideration (if an idea is not determined to have sufficient merit, the reason for the determination will be reported to the Technical Committee); and 3. The Core Stakeholder Group will be the ultimate arbiter concerning whether or not a late in process change/idea is carried forth if a decision cannot be made at the Technical Committee level.
11. Success Measures To be defined by group. Some possible items include: •
Approved IJR and Environmental Document
•
Meet project schedule and budget
•
Priority projects positioned for funding
12. Risk Assessment To be defined by group. Some possible items include: •
Changes in project team or stakeholder membership
•
Schedule
•
Changes to key decisions
•
Revisiting previously agreed upon issues, topics or policies
•
Policy changes
•
Design approval
CA-8
FINAL | hwlochner.com
DRAFT
13. Project Communication Internal: Karl Otterstrom, Director of Planning, Spokane Transit Authority; Don Skillingstad, Capital Projects Manager, Spokane Transit Authority; Mike Frucci, WSDOT Project Manager; and Steve Lewis, consultant team Project Manager will be the primary source of communication to the Core Stakeholder Group and Technical Committee. Project information will be provided to participants via email and an internal team website prepared and hosted by the Spokane Transit Authority, on which project related data, reports, graphics and other information will be posted as it becomes available. Lochner will provide meeting agendas, meeting materials, and will prepare meeting notes following each meeting. External: Media inquiries will be routed through Karl Otterstrom and Don Skillingstad, Spokane Transit Authority. WSDOT or Spokane Transit Authority may host a project website on which information will be posted as it is available and ready for public review.
CA-9
City of Airway Heights Fairchild Air Force Base
90
§ ¨ ¦
Spokane International Airport
City of Spokane
_ ^ City of Medical Lake
Proposed West Plains Transit Center
90
§ ¨ ¦
µ
0
2.5
5
City of Cheney
10 Miles
West Plains Area Figure 1
Attachment A West Plains Transit Center Project Schedule
Task # Task 1 Stakeholder Coordination 1.2 Core Stakeholder Meetings 1.2 Technical Committee Meetings 1.2 STA Board Meeting/Presentation 2 2.1 2.1.9 2.1.9 2.1.9
Interchange Justification Report Draft IJR Report Preparation Final IJR Report Engineering Acceptance of IJR Report Approval of IJR
3 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7.7
Environmental Review NEPA - Right of Way NEPA - Geotech/Environmental NEPA - Project SEPA
3.5
Right of Way Acquisition
4 4.1 4.2 4.3
PS&E Design Documents 30% Design Documents 60% Design Documents 90% Design Documents
Jul
2014 Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan
2015 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan
2016 Feb Mar
November 19, 2014
ATTACHMENT B 2014
2015
AGENCY COORDINATION A
S
O
N
D
J
F
M
A
M
Core Stakeholder Group Meetings Kick-Off Meeting
7th
Meeting 1
6th
Meeting 2
11th
Meeting 3
20th Technical Stakeholder Committee
Kick-Off Meeting Meeting 1 Meeting 2 Meeting 3 Meeting 4
7th 11th 2nd 6th 8th
Meeting 5 Meeting 6 Agency Coordination meeting dates are subject to change. An announcement with agenda will be sent 2-weeks prior to meeting date.
12th 24th
J
Introduction and Project Description The Spokane Transit Authority (STA) West Plains Transit Center project is located near Exit 272 along I-90 in the West Plains area of Spokane County. The transit center will be an important element of the future High Performance Transit Network (HPT) providing service throughout the West Plains. In early 2012, conceptual studies for the West Plains Transit Center were started. As a result of these studies, preliminary concepts and construction cost opinions were developed. After meeting with local agencies, these concepts and cost opinions were updated in March, 2013. Under the current conceptual design, the West Plains Transit Center will feature three passenger loading platforms and one park and ride lot with at least 100 parking stalls. The main loading platform will feature at least three bus bays to accommodate current and future service growth. Another loading platform will be adjacent to the eastbound off-ramp and accommodate mainline transit service along I-90. The remaining loading platform will serve westbound buses along I-90 and be connected to the rest of the transit center by a pedestrian bridge. Other features will include a transit-only flyer stop, transit lanes as needed, landscaping, lighting, bicycle parking, passenger shelters, and intelligent transportation systems (ITS). Architectural treatments and design features will also be incorporated into the project. This interchange justification report (IJR) will evaluate the base conditions and the proposed build alternatives as recommended by the Technical Committee and approved by the Core Stakeholder Group and STA Board for the opening year and design year periods. These build alternatives may include the following three options: 1. Express buses using the existing street systems to access the transit center. 2. Express buses using a new westbound median flyer stop and a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound lanes to the westbound median flyer stop. 3. Express buses using a new westbound flyer stop adjacent to the westbound on-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound and westbound lanes to the westbound flyer stop.
Purpose of the Project The purpose of the West Plains Transit Center is to expand connectivity to the West Plains communities and improve travel times to and from Cheney and Eastern Washington University by providing improved high quality, higher performance and costeffective transit services that will address mobility needs for an expanding population and employment base west of Spokane. Multi-modal transportation services will be enhanced through: • • • •
Improving connectivity between cities and to the West Plains area; Providing easy and fast connections to high performance transit service along the I-90 corridor; Improving transit access to residential and employment areas adjacent to Exit 272 by providing convenient transfers between local and express bus services; and Reducing congestion by providing an attractive alternative for single occupant vehicle (SOV) users.
This project will include completion of an Interchange Justification Report (IJR) process to determine the preferred solution for the construction of the West Plains Transit Center project in cooperation with STA, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC), and Spokane County. The results of the IJR will enable STA to assess options and opportunities to improve the transportation system within the study area and complete design plans for construction.
M&A - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Project Leads and Proponents • • • • • • •
Spokane Transit Authority Federal Transit Administration Federal Highway Administration Washington State Department of Transportation Spokane Regional Transportation Council Spokane County Spokane International Airport
Environmental Document Type At this time, we anticipate a NEPA Documented Categorical Exclusion (and SEPA Checklist).
Level of Documentation The proposed improvement options will include revisions to the existing eastbound off-ramp configuration, a center median westbound bus-only flyer stop or a westbound north side flyer stop with changes to the existing westbound on-ramp configuration. As required by WSDOT and FHWA, eight specific policy points will be addressed in the IJR. These are: •
Policy Point 1 documents the need for the access point revision. STA is embarking on a process of improving multimodal transportation services and developing a HPT Network. Policy Point 1 will document the need for access revisions in order to achieve the desired transit level of service to achieve that purpose.
•
Policy Point 2 provides a discussion of the reasonable alternatives evaluated. Building on previously completed studies, they will include: o
The do-nothing alternative which will include providing all transit service at the park and ride lot;
o
A center median option; and
o
A north side lane option.
•
Policy Point 3 includes the Operational & Collision Analysis. For this IJR, the only change in traffic is bus access at the Medical Lake Interchange with no changes at the upstream and downstream interchanges. As a result, this analysis will focus on either the weave or merge operations along I-90 and bus movements through the ramp terminals at the Medical Lake Interchange, depending on the preferred alternative.
•
Policy Point 4 discusses access connections and design. This policy point will include evaluation of limited improvements for bus-only access to a transit stop along the main line, connected to a park and ride lot via a pedestrian bridge. Local street access will not be changed as part of this project; although there will be a “forward compatibility” analysis with WSDOT plans for future interchange improvements (at this time these appear to be limited to roundabouts at the ramp terminals).
•
Policy Point 5 addresses compatibility with land use and transportation plans.
•
Policy Point 6 reviews compatibility with the comprehensive transportation network plan and anticipated new access points.
•
Policy Point 7 deals with coordinating projects and actions programmed for funding.
•
Policy Point 8 includes a brief summary of the environmental process.
M&A - 3
Analysis Years/Periods Operational analysis will include both AM and PM peak hours for the following years: • • •
Existing Base Year – 2014 Assumed Opening Year – 2020 Horizon/Design Year – 2040
Project and Study Areas This project will only affect transit bus routings at the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange with no impacts to the upstream or downstream interchanges. As a result, the project area for this IJR will focus on the SR 902/Medical Lake Road Interchange (Exit 272 MP 272.81) and extend along I-90 to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange (Exit 270 MP 270.55) to analyze weave and merge/diverge operations associated with the bus-only access changes. The Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange (Exit 276 MP 276.32) will not be analyzed. The study area of the local street system will include the following major street intersections: • • • • •
Eastbound ramps at SR 902/Medical Lake Road and I-90 ramp; Westbound ramps at SR 902/Medical Lake Road and I-90 ramp; W. Aero Road and W. Westbow Boulevard; W. Westbow Boulevard and S. Hayford Road; and S. Hayford Road and W. Medical Lake Road.
The overall study area for traffic forecasting purposes will include all of Spokane County, as defined by the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) travel demand model.
Traffic Operations Analysis For interstate highway operations, Highway Capacity Software (HCS) will be used to analyze merge/diverge connections. Average vehicle speed and density will be used as performance measures for the HCS analysis. For ramp terminal/surface street operations, intersections will be analyzed as follows: • • • • •
Synchro 8.0 software will be used to analyze the operations of signalized intersections. Synchro 8.0 software or HCS will be used to analyze un-signalized intersections. SIDRA software package will be used to analyze roundabout controlled intersections. SimTraffic will be used for queuing and turn lane spillover analysis. HCS will be used to analyze weave sections, merge/diverge area and level of service on the interstate.
Both AM and PM peak hour analysis will be used for the three analysis years. For the purpose of Level of Service (LOS) and traffic impact calculations, a single peak hour analysis is required. The existing peak one-hour volumes generally fall into the 7:00-8:00 AM and 4:30- 5:30 PM time periods. All traffic analysis will be reported for the AM and PM single peak hours only.
M&A - 4
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Travel Forecast For this IJR analysis, the SRTC travel demand model will be used to provide a basis for the above analysis years and periods. The SRTC model includes both the existing plus committed projects for the region from the 4-year Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) and Horizon 2040. It is anticipated that model “post-processing” will be utilized to account for localized discrepancies between existing “ground counts” and model-generated volumes. The recommended method will be the Factoring Procedure – Difference Method per NCHRP 765 Chapter 6, which add the “model growth increment” (the difference between the 2010 and the future year model volumes) to the existing ground count traffic volumes. The following 3 model runs are assumed: • • •
2010 Base Year 2020 with current four year TIP and 2020 Land Use 2040 with TIP and unfunded regional improvements and 2040 land use
Safety Issues This IJR will use the current Collision Analysis Location/Collision Analysis Corridor (CAL/CAC) criteria and the Intersection Analysis Location (IAL) criteria for state highways within the project area, as prepared by WSDOT. In addition, the collision rates along local streets will be estimated using available local collision data. Types of collisions and contributing factors will also be summarized by location. The most recent five years of available collision data will be used for this analysis. This corridor specific information, as well as statewide system collision statistics, will be used in a predictive collision analysis effort to estimate any change in the level of safety for the interstate and connecting roadways. The Highway Safety Manual will be used for this analysis.
Selection of Measures of Effectiveness The metrics to be used to demonstrate how the proposal will accomplish the stated objectives will be our measures of effectiveness (MOE). Possible metrics may include, but are not limited to, the following: • • • • • • • •
Travel time (in minutes) for bus routes on the Interstate and local streets through the project area. LOS and density along I-90 and LOS at merge and diverge locations. Average delay times (in seconds) at all ramp terminals with an LOS table. Maximum queue length on ramps and arterials (95% queue lengths). Area of critical environmental habitat impacted by improvements. Compatibility with local plans. Safety analysis results (collision potential/risk reduction). Deviations needed to implement improvements.
Deviations/Justifications The Interchange Justification Report will be developed per WSDOT Design Manual Chapter 550. The HOV direct access facilities will be designed per WSDOT Design Manual Chapter 550. At this point in the process, there are no new deviations identified. Deviations may be identified through the various study results, and will be documented as they arise.
M&A - 5
Conclusion The proposed improvement will improve transit service to be competitive with SOVs, maintain existing riders, and attract new riders, thereby reducing vehicle-miles travelled through the area. Engineering judgment will be applied to arrive at the best overall set of improvements that are the most practical within the study area.
M&A - 6
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Purpose and Need Statement Project Description The Spokane Transit Authority (STA), in cooperation with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), is completing an Interchange Justification Report and Design Plans in order to implement one element of its High Performance Transit (HPT) Network near the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange with Interstate 90 (I-90) at Exit 272. This report documents the Purpose and Need for the project, provides a summary of why transit improvements are needed in this area, including a new West Plains Transit Center with freeway flyer stops for local and express bus connections to meet area needs.
Purpose The purpose of the West Plains Transit Center is to expand connectivity to the West Plains communities and improve travel times to and from the City of Cheney and Eastern Washington University by providing improved high quality, higher performance and cost effective transit services that will address mobility needs for an expanding population and employment base west of Spokane. Multi-modal transportation services will be enhanced through:
Improving connectivity between cities and to the West Plains area; Providing easy and fast connections to HPT service along the I-90 corridor; Improving transit access to residential and employment areas adjacent to Exit 272 by providing convenient transfers between local and express bus services; and Reducing congestion by providing an attractive alternative for single occupant vehicle (SOV) users.
As part of this project, an Interchange Justification Report (IJR) will be completed to determine the preferred solution for the West Plains Transit Center project, in cooperation with FHWA, WSDOT, SRTC, Spokane County, and the Spokane International Airport. The results of the IJR will enable the project stakeholders to assess options and opportunities to improve the transportation system within the project area.
Need (Problem Definition) Between 1990 and 2012, STA’s total annual ridership increased 65 percent.1 Changes in land use and lifestyle choices have influenced the demand for competitive travel options in the West Plains area and to Eastern Washington University in Cheney. In the West Plains area, several specific problems should be addressed as part of this project to help retain and increase ridership on the current network and improve STA’s competitiveness with other modes of transportation – expressed by travel time. This is especially true as related to serving the increasing demand for competitive travel alternatives between Spokane and Cheney/Eastern Washington University (nearly 20 percent of travelers on SR 904 between I-90 and Cheney are on an STA bus). For example, currently, travel time for transit users between Spokane and Eastern Washington University is 52% more than automobile travel and yet nearly 20% percent of travelers on SR 904 (the main State Highway connecting the University to
1
Connect Spokane, A Comprehensive Plan for Public Transportation, May 2014, page 11.
P&N - 1
I-90 and on into Spokane) use the existing bus transit route. There is an increasing demand for more frequent and reliable transit service between Spokane and Cheney. The “needs” STA plans to meet by completing this project include:
Improve travel times for all users; Provide more direct bus service for the West Plains area to Eastern Washington University; Reduce operating costs; Respond to increased demand for service as a result of population and employment growth; Provide more direct transit connections between major employers in the West Plains “service area.”
Goals and Objectives Four purpose statements have been developed to guide this process, including a set of goals and objectives as shown in the table below. The Purpose and Need Statement, including the associated goals and objectives, were developed by a Technical Committee made up of representatives of participating agencies, including STA, WSDOT, FHWA, Spokane County, the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC), and the Spokane International Airport (SIA). This Purpose and Need Statement was adopted by the Core Stakeholder Group, made up from most of these same agencies, and will be presented to the public for comment as part of the outreach process. Purpose Statement
Goals & Objectives Expand the HPT Network along I-90.
1
Improve connectivity between cities and to the West Plains area.
Integrate local circulator buses with the HPT Network. Improve pedestrian and bicycle interconnectivity to the HPT Network. Improve transit speed and reliability.
2
Provide easy and fast connections to express bus service along the I-90 corridor in the West Plains area.
Improve the waiting and boarding experience. Provide a high level of pedestrian safety.
3
Improve transit access to residential and employment areas adjacent to Exit 272 by providing convenient transfers between local and express bus services.
Provide a park-and-ride facility for transit and shared-ride users.
4
Reduce congestion by providing an attractive alternative for SOV users.
Improve operational efficiency by reducing bus circulating and stop time.
Summary To meet these principles, STA must provide fast and convenient service through the West Plains area and provide competitive travel times as compared to SOVs. To provide this service, STA’s buses should minimize time on local roads and in the transit center. By routing buses through the proposed West Plain Transit Center, buses will be off I-90 for 8 to 11 minutes for each stop at the transit center, as compared to less than two minutes to access the transit station with flyer stops along I-90. By not providing freeway flyer stops, it will be more difficult for STA to provide competitive transit service to maintain existing riders, attract new riders and meet the goals associated with the West Plains Transit Center project. By incorporating flier stops along I-90 in the West Plain area, STA will be better equipped to provide fast and convenient service and meet their goals and objectives.
P&N - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Policy Point 1: Need for the Access Point Revision What are the current and projected needs? Why are the existing access points and the existing or improved local system unable to meet the proposal needs? Is the anticipated demand short or long trip?
Introduction The Spokane Transit Authority (STA), in cooperation with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), is proposing a new West Plains Transit Center with freeway flyer stops for local and express bus connections, near the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange with Interstate 90 (I-90) at Exit 272. STA’s goal is to provide fast and convenient service connecting the West Plains and Medical Lake area with downtown Spokane, Cheney, Washington, the Eastern Washington University and Spokane International Airport by providing competitive transit travel times, as compared to Single Occupant Vehicles (SOVs). To provide this service, STA’s buses should minimize time on local roads and in the transit center. By routing buses through the proposed West Plain Transit Center, buses will be off I-90 for 8 to 11 minutes for each stop at the transit center, as compared to less than two minutes to access the transit station with flyer stops along I-90.
Spokane Transit Authority West Plains Transit Center Project The STA West Plains Transit Center project is located near Exit 272 along I-90 in the West Plains area of Spokane County. The transit center will be an important element of the future High Performance Transit Network (HPTN) providing service throughout the West Plains. In early 2012, conceptual studies for the West Plains Transit Center were started. As a result of these studies, preliminary concepts and construction cost opinions were developed. After meeting with local agencies, these concepts and cost opinions were updated in March, 2013. Under the current conceptual design, the West Plains Transit Center will feature three passenger loading platforms and park and ride lot with at least 100 parking stalls. The main loading platform will feature at least three bus bays to accommodate current and future service growth. Another loading platform will be adjacent to the eastbound off-ramp and accommodate mainline transit service along I-90. The remaining loading platform will serve westbound buses along I-90 and be connected to the rest of the transit center by a pedestrian bridge. Other features will include landscaping, lighting, bicycle parking, passenger shelters, and intelligent transportation systems (ITS). Architectural treatments and design features will also be incorporated into the project. The West Plains Transit Center project will include the construction of:
100 parking stalls for commuters plus room for future expansion; Freeway bus lane (median or adjacent to westbound through lanes on north side) to create an efficient connection with frequent service to Cheney (4,000+ riders each day during Eastern Washington University school days, approximately 10% of I-90 rider throughput on the West Plains); Pedestrian bridge from the bus only freeway flyer stop to the transit center (possible extension to north side of freeway in the future for non-motorized access should the median station be the preferred option); and Three bus loading platforms to allow for additional capacity to connect to Medical Lake, Airway Heights, Fairchild Air Force Base, Spokane International Airport, and surrounding residential neighborhoods and businesses from one central location.
PP1 - 1
Purpose of this Interchange Justification Report This Interchange Justification Report (IJR) report will address several specific problems to help retain and increase ridership on the current network and improve STA’s competitiveness with other modes of transportation – expressed by travel time. This is especially true as related to serving the increasing demand for competitive travel alternatives between Spokane and Cheney/Eastern Washington University (nearly 20 percent of travelers on SR 904 between I-90 and Cheney are on an STA bus). For example, currently, travel time for transit users between Spokane and Eastern Washington University is 52% more than automobile travel and yet nearly 20% percent of travelers on SR 904 (the main State Highway connecting the University to I-90 and on into Spokane) use the existing bus transit route. And transit users from Medical Lake currently have to travel east to Downtown Spokane and then west on express buses to Cheney. There is an increasing demand for more frequent and reliable transit services between Medical Lake and Cheney, and between Spokane and Cheney. The proposed West Plains Transit Center with flyer stations should improve connectivity for travel between major employers and cities in the West Plain`s area, while providing reliable access to Spokane and Cheney. The additional transit access points along the interstate and the off-ramp for the flyer stops is the focus of this IJR. To accommodate eastbound transit express buses along I-90, a flyer stop with a loading platform adjacent to the transit center will be located on the eastbound off-ramp to the Medical Lake Interchange. A median or westbound on-ramp transit flyer stop is proposed for westbound buses traveling along I-90 with new access and egress points along I-90. The median flyer stop will be connected to the transit center by a pedestrian bridge.
Project Study Area This project will only affect transit bus routings at the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange with no impacts to the upstream or downstream interchanges. As a result, the project area for this IJR will focus on the SR 902/Medical Lake Road Interchange (Exit 272, MP 272.81) and extend along I-90 to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange (Exit 270, MP 270.55) to analyze weave and merge/diverge operations associated with the bus-only access changes. The Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange (Exit 276, MP 276.32) will not be analyzed. The study area of the local street system will include the following major street intersections:
Eastbound ramps at SR 902/Medical Lake Road and I-90 ramp; Westbound ramps at SR 902/Medical Lake Road and I-90 ramp; W. Aero Road and W. Westbow Boulevard; W. Westbow Boulevard and S. Hayford Road; and S. Hayford Road and W. Medical Lake Road.
The overall study area for traffic forecasting purposes will include all of Spokane County, as defined by the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) travel demand model. Further information about the model and assumptions for this project is summarized in the I-90/SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange Justification Report – Methods & Assumptions Documents.
PP1 - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Figure 1.1 Study Area Map
PP1 - 3
Existing and Future Needs For this IJR analysis, the SRTC travel demand models were used to provide a basis for the above analysis years and periods. The SRTC model includes both the existing plus committed projects for the region from the 4-year Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) for the County and member Cities, and the future unfunded improvements for the County and member Cities. The lists of the Horizon 2040 Regional Significant Projects are contained in Appendix PP1-A. It is anticipated that model “postprocessing” will be utilized to account for localized discrepancies between existing “ground counts” and model-generated volumes. The recommended method will be the Factoring Procedure – Difference Method per NCHRP 765 Chapter 6, which add the “model growth increment” (the difference between the 2010 and the future year model volumes) to the existing ground count traffic volumes. The following 3 model runs are assumed:
2014 Base Year 2020 with current four year TIP and 2020 land use 2040 with TIP and unfunded regional improvements and 2040 land use
Operational analysis methods and assumptions are based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010 methodology. Both AM and PM peak periods were analyzed to determine operational conditions for the following three scenarios: existing (2014), opening year (2020), and design year (2040). The existing conditions analysis was based on 2014 counts. To provide a better understanding of existing and future baseline traffic operations at the study area, Synchro models were constructed for a detailed analysis of the intersections.
Existing and Future Base Conditions Transit Travel Times Currently, there is no direct bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area to Cheney without having to travel to downtown Spokane and transferring to the Cheney/Eastern Washington University express bus. Based on published transit schedules, transit service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area takes about 20 to 25 minutes to downtown Spokane and then about 23 to 25 minutes to Cheney/Eastern Washington University via the express bus; for a total travel time of about 43 to 50 minutes, plus transfer time in downtown Spokane. By 2020, the West Plains Transit Center will be open for operations. Bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area will be re-routed to serve the new transit center and riders will be able to transfer to the Cheney/Eastern Washington University express bus. By 2040, WSDOT may complete their I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project (3 roundabouts and revised diamond interchange), the travel times for the bus service through the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections may be improved. Further information about the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement Project is contained in the I-90 SR 902 Interchange Improvements Value Engineering Study dated February 2013. For comparison purposes the following travel time analysis is based on the travel demand model, for travel through the study area from the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange.
1. Existing Transit Travel Times Today through the study area, transit buses operate at current interstate speeds on I-90 mainline. No express bus stops at the Medical lake area. The peak hour transit travel time between the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange and the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange is approximately 5 minutes.
PP1 - 4
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
2. 2020 Base Conditions Transit Travel Times In 2020, the West Plains Transit Center will be in operation. Without the flyer stop, these express buses must exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center. This re-routing will increase the express bus travel time by approximately 13 to 17 minutes, assuming the ramp intersections remain stop controlled.
3. 2040 Base Conditions Transit Travel Times By 2040, the West Plains Transit Center will have been in operations for several years. Without the flyer stop, these express buses must exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center. This re-routing will increase the express bus travel time by approximately 18 to 38 minutes, assuming the ramp intersections remain stop controlled. If the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project which is not currently completely funded would be constructed before 2040, the LOS on the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections may be improved, as well as the travel times for the bus service. Without the fly stop, the express buses exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center, the rerouting will increase the express bus travel time by approximately 8 to 11 minutes.
Existing and Future Base Conditions I-90 Freeway Operation The existing and future base conditions analysis reviewed the traffic operations of the current I-90 mainline and ramps for existing 2014, opening year 2020 and design year 2040, in the study area. Table 1.2 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour results of the freeway LOS analysis for I-90. Freeway LOS operations are measured by the density of traffic in passenger cars per mile per lane during the AM and PM peak hours. Table 1.2 Baseline Freeway Level of Service Summary Location
Type
AM Peak Hour Existing
2020
PM Peak Hour 2040
Existing
2020
2040
I‐90, Westbound I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 904
Diverge
A
A
A
A
B
B
I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
A
B
B
B
B
C
I-90 WB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
A
B
B
B
B
B
I-90 WB, under SR 902
Basic
A
A
B
B
B
B
Diverge
A
A
B
B
B
B
Basic
B
B
B
B
C
C
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
I‐90, Eastbound I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
B
B
B
A
B
B
Diverge
A
B
B
A
A
A
I-90 EB, under SR 902
Basic
A
B
B
A
A
B
I-90 EB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
B
B
B
B
B
I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Basic
B
B
C
B
B
B
I-90 EB, off-ramp to SR 902
The existing conditions analysis indicated that all freeway segments operate at LOS B or better during the AM and PM peak hour. The 2020 (opening Year) conditions analysis indicates that all freeway segments operate at LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hour. For design year 2040, the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project may be constructed; it is expected the LOS on the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections will be improved significantly. However, the WSDOT improvement project PP1 - 5
would have insignificant impact to the freeway operations. The Level of Service for the freeway operations would maintain the same with or without the ramp terminal improvements. During the AM and PM peak hour, all freeway segments operate at LOS C or better.
Existing and Future Base Condition Intersection Traffic Operation The intersection traffic operation evaluation examined five intersections in the study area, including ramp termini and adjacent intersections at the Medical Lake interchange. The LOS at each intersection is determined by average control and queue delays per vehicle in seconds. Table1.3 summarizes the intersection LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours for existing 2014, opening year 2020 and design year 2040. Table 1.3 Baseline Intersection Level of Service Summary No.
Intersection
Traffic Control1
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Existing
2020
2040
2040 with RAB
Existing
2020
2040
2040 with RAB
1
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
2
E/36.4
F/481
F/1734
A/8.6
D/28.7
F/710
F/2445
A/8
2
WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
2
D/33
F/177
F/340
A/6.7
D/30.5
F/223
F/371
A/7.8
3
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
AW
A/9.9
B/10.9
B/11.9
B/11.9
B/10.3
B/14
C/15.5
C/15.5
4
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
TW
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/9
B/13.1
B/13.7
B/13.7
5
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
TW
D/29.7
F/864
F/1994
A/3.8
F/107.2
F/3185
F/5741
A/7.2
2
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection 2. Two Way stop intersection becomes roundabout under "2040 with Roundabout" option 3. Delay is in minutes
1. Existing Intersection Traffic Operation Currently, four of the study intersections have minor street stop-controls and one intersection is all-way stop-controlled. In the AM peak hour, all intersections operate overall at LOS D or better except EB Ramp intersection which operates at LOS E. In the PM peak hour, the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road Intersection operates at LOS F with westbound failing approach.
2. 2020 Base Conditions Intersection Traffic Operation Under 2020 base conditions, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS F in Both AM and PM peak hour. The other 2 intersections would operate at LOS B or better.
3. 2040 Base Conditions Intersection Traffic Operation Year 2040 was identified as the design year based on available land use and traffic forecasts. If the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project is constructed; it is expected the LOS on the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections will be improved significantly. To better understand the traffic operations of the current facility at the design year, two different base conditions intersection analysis are conducted:
PP1 - 6
without the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) with the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) proposed by WSDOT
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Under 2040 base conditions without the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS F in both AM and PM peak hour. The other 2 intersections would operate at LOS C or better. Under 2040 base conditions with the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS A in both AM and PM peak hour. The other 2 intersections would operate at LOS C or better. Further information about the existing and future base conditions traffic analysis for this project is contained in Policy Point 3.
Summary Project Purpose: The purpose of the West Plains Transit Center is to expand connectivity to the West Plains communities and improve travel times to and from Cheney and Eastern Washington University by providing improved high quality, higher performance and cost effective transit service that will address mobility needs for an expanding population and employment base west of Downtown Spokane. Multi-modal transportation services will be improved through:
Improving connectivity between cities and to the West Plains area; Providing easy and fast connections to high performance transit service along the I-90 corridor; Improving transit access to residential and employment areas adjacent to Exit 272 by providing convenient transfers between local and express bus services; and Reducing congestion by providing an attractive alternative for single occupant vehicle (SOV) users.
Project Need: Between 1990 and 2012, STA’s total annual ridership increased 65 percent. 1Changes in land use and lifestyle choices have influenced the demand for competitive travel options, possibly no more so than in the West Plains Area and to Eastern Washington University in Cheney. In response to regional growth and the need for competitive travel options, STA has developed a plan for a High Performance Transit Network (HPTN) which is a series of corridors anticipated to provide all-day, two-way, reliable, and frequent service that will be competitive in travel speed to private automobiles. By not providing freeway flier stops, it will be harder for STA to provide competitive transit service to maintain existing riders, attract new riders and meet all the goals associated with the West Plains Transit Center project. By incorporating flier stops along I-90 in the West Plain area, there is no need for express buses to exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center. This will save the express bus travel time by approximately 8 to 11 minutes. STA will be more equipped to provide fast and convenient service and meet their goals and objectives.
1
Connect Spokane, A Comprehensive Plan for Public Transportation, May 2014, page 11. PP1 - 7
Policy Point 2: Reasonable Alternatives Describe the reasonable alternatives.
Transportation System Management Providing convenient and fast connections to a high performance transportation network that is an attractive alternative for single occupant vehicle users is the basis for this project. It means that taking a Transportation System Management (TSM) approach to the identification of alternatives for the West Plains Transit Center project will not provide an acceptable alternative to constructing a transit flyer stop in the median or adjacent to the westbound on-ramp. Without the flyer stops, it will be difficult for STA to minimize time on local roads and in the transit center. By routing buses through the proposed West Plains Transit Center on local roads, buses will be off I-90 for 8 to 11 minutes for each stop, as compared to less than two minutes to access the transit station with flyer stops along I-90. There is no evidence that other TSM applications would serve as effectively in the Design Year as the proposed flyer stops.
Improvement Alternatives Under the current conceptual design, the West Plains Transit Center will feature three passenger loading platforms and a park and ride facility with at least 100 parking stalls. The main loading platform will feature at least three bus bays to accommodate current and future service growth. Another loading platform will be adjacent to the eastbound off-ramp and accommodate mainline transit service along I-90. The remaining loading platform will serve westbound buses along I-90 and be connected to the transit center by a pedestrian bridge. Other features will include a transit-only flyer stop, transit lanes as needed, landscaping, lighting, bicycle parking, passenger shelters, and intelligent transportation systems (ITS). Architectural treatments and design features will also be incorporated into the project. This Interchange Justification Report (IJR) will evaluate the proposed alternatives as recommended by the Technical Committee and approved by the Core Stakeholder Group and the STA Board for the opening year and design year periods. These alternatives include the following four options:
Express buses using the existing street systems to access the transit center. See Alternative 1 – No Build. Express buses using a new westbound median flyer stop and a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound lanes to the westbound median flyer stop. See Alternative 2. Express buses using a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and a new westbound flyer stop adjacent to the westbound on-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound and westbound lanes to the westbound flyer stop. See Alternative 3A. Express buses using a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and a new westbound shoulder flyer stop adjacent to I-90 west of the W. Aero Road undercrossing. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound and westbound lanes to the westbound flyer stop. See Alternative 3B.
PP2 - 1
Future WSDOT Improvements The WSDOT has plans to improve the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. The project, which is in the conceptual design phase, includes the construction of three roundabouts; one at each of the ramp terminals and one at the intersection of W. Aero Road and realigned W. Geiger Boulevard. The project, which is currently unfunded, has an estimated construction cost of $18 million. Although these future improvements are to be included in the traffic analysis, they are not part of the West Plains Transit Center project. The graphic depicting the WSDOT future improvements are shown in Figure 2.5.
PP2 - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Figure 2.1 Alternative 1 – No Build
PP2 - 3
Figure 2.2 Alternative 2 – Eastbound Off-Ramp Flyer Stop and Westbound Median Flyer Stop
J-U-B Concept Plan August 30, 2012
PP2 - 4
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Figure 2.3 Alternative 3A – Eastbound and Westbound Ramp Flyer Stops
PP2 - 5
Figure 2.4 Alternative 3B – Eastbound Ramp Flyer Stop and Westbound Shoulder Flyer Stop
PP2 - 6
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Figure 2.5 WSDOT Future Improvements
WSDOT I-90/SR-902 Interchange Improvements, Value Engineering Study, February 2013
PP2 - 7
Policy Point 3: Operational and Collision Analysis How will the proposal affect safety and traffic operations at year of opening and design year?
Summary Policy Point 3 documents the operational and collision effects of the proposed build alternatives. For this Interchange Justification Report (IJR), the only change in traffic is bus access at the Medical Lake Interchange, with no changes at the upstream and downstream interchanges. As a result, this analysis will focus on the weave and merge operations along Interstate 90 (I-90) and bus movements through the ramp terminals at the Medical Lake Interchange. The analysis is consistent with the procedures outlined in the I-90/SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange Justification Report – Methods & Assumptions Document. The Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) travel demand models were used to provide a basis for the existing, 2020, and 2040 analysis years and periods. The SRTC model includes both the existing plus committed projects for the region from the 4-year Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs), as well as future regionally significant projects. The park and ride facility for the West Plains Transit Center was also included in the SRTC travel demand models as the Alternative 1 – Base Conditions. The traffic impacts related to the park and ride and associated movements through the ramp terminal, are addressed separately through the Spokane County required Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). The operational analyses for the build alternatives are summarized as follows:
Assume the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project would be completed before 2040; the Alternative 1 – Base Conditions transit travel times through the study area would be 14 minutes for westbound trips and 13 minutes for eastbound trips during the peak hours. The transit travel times for Build Alternative 2 and Build Alternative 3B would be around 7 minutes for westbound trips and 8 minutes for eastbound trips during the peak hours. The transit travel times for Build Alternative 3A would be 8 minutes for both eastbound and westbound trips. The Build Alternative 2 and Build Alternative 3B have the shortest transit travel times overall. As compared to Alternative 1 – Base Conditions, the West Plains Transit Center flyer stop build alternatives would have minor operational impact to the I-90 mainline and I-90 ramps in the study area. All freeway segments and merge/diverge areas operate at Level of Services (LOS) C or better during the peak hours for 2020 and 2040. The West Plains Transit Center flyer stops would have minor impact on the LOS for the I-90 ramp intersections and local street intersections. Without the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, all build alternatives would operate at LOS F at the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection during the peak hours for 2020 and 2040. With the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, all build alternatives would operate at LOS A at the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection during the peak hours. The weave analysis for the westbound I-90 segment between the proposed West Plains Transit Center median flyer stop and SR 904 off-ramp, shows that the freeway weave section operates at LOS C or better during the peak hours in 2040.
The collision analyses indicate that the build alternatives have minor impact on the safety of the freeway and the adjacent local street system in the study area, as compared to Alternative 1 – Base Conditions in 2040. This is because the build alternatives only involve a few express buses accessing the West Plains Transit Center during the peak hours.
PP3 - 1
Traffic Operational Analysis – Base Conditions Existing Transit Travel Times Today, there is no direct bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area to Cheney without having to travel to downtown Spokane and transferring to the Cheney/Eastern Washington University express bus. Based on published transit schedules, transit service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area takes about 20 to 25 minutes to downtown Spokane and then about 23 to 25 minutes to Cheney/Eastern Washington University via the express bus; for a total travel time of about 43 to 50 minutes, plus transfer time in downtown Spokane. For this IJR, the only change in traffic is bus access at the Medical Lake Interchange, with no changes at the other part of the bus route. As a result, this analysis will focus on a segment of the transit route within the study area. For comparison purposes, the following travel time analysis is based on the existing travel demand model, for travel through the study area from the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange, a distance of 5.77 miles. Assuming transit buses operate at current interstate posted speeds (70 mph), these peak hour travel times are: • •
Eastbound AM Peak Hour Westbound AM Peak Hour
4.8 min. 4.8 min.
• •
Eastbound PM Peak Hour Westbound PM Peak Hour
4.8 min. 4.8 min.
Existing (2014) Traffic Analyses The existing 2014 traffic analysis reviewed the freeway and intersection performance in the study area. Freeway Operations: Table 3.1 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour results of the freeway LOS analysis for I-90. In accordance with the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) freeway LOS operations are measured by the density of traffic, expressed in passenger cars per mile per lane during the AM and PM peak hours. During the AM and PM peak hour, all freeway segments operate at LOS B or better. Table 3.1 2014 Existing Freeway Levels of Service Location
Type
AM Peak Hour
LOS I-90, Westbound
PM Peak Hour
¹Density
LOS
¹Density
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 904
Diverge
A
3.3
A
8.3
I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
A
10.4
B
14.6
I-90 WB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
A
9.3
B
14.0
I-90 WB, under SR 902
Basic
A
9.2
B
13.2
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 902
Diverge
A
6.2
B
11.3
I-90 WB, East of SR 902
Basic
B
12.3
B
16.6
I-90, Eastbound I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
B
12.2
A
10.2
I-90 EB, off-ramp to SR 902
Diverge
A
8.2
A
5.8
I-90 EB, under SR 902
Basic
A
11.0
A
8.6
I-90 EB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
14.1
B
10.9
I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Basic
B
15.2
B
12.2 1 Density: vehicle/lane/mile
PP3 - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Intersections: The evaluation examined five intersections in the study area, including ramp termini and adjacent intersections. Table 3.2 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours. The LOS at each intersection is determined by average control and queue delays per vehicle in seconds, based on HCM procedures. For nonsignalized intersections, the LOS is generally determined by the worst approach or movement. For signalized intersections, an overall intersection LOS is calculated. Four of the study intersections have minor street stop-controls and one intersection, Aero Road at Westbow Boulevard, is allway stop-controlled. In the AM peak hour, all intersections operate overall at LOS D or better except Eastbound Ramp intersection which operates at LOS E. In the PM peak hour, the Hayford/Medical Lake Road Intersection operates at LOS F with westbound approach failing. Table 3.2 2014 Existing Intersection LOS Summary No
Intersection
Traffic Control
¹AM Peak Hour EB
WB
¹PM Peak Hour
NB
SB
Total
EB
A/0
A/4.2
E/36.4
D/28.7
D/33
A/2.5
A/0
D/33
A/9.3
A/9.9
1
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
2
WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
3
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
AW
A/9.1
B/11
B/10.6
4
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
TW
A/0
A/6.1
A/8.8
5
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
TW
B/13.4
D/29.7
A/0.1
E/36.4
A/1.4
WB
NB
SB
Total
A/0
A/2.8
D/28.7
D/30.5
A/1.9
A/0
D/30.5
B/10.2
B/10.3
B/11.2
A/9.8
B/10.3
A/8.8
A/0
A/5.7
A/9
D/29.7
B/10.2
F/107.2
A/0.2
A/9 A/1.3
F/107.2
1 Delay is in seconds
Future Base Conditions for 2020 (Year of Opening) and 2040 (Design Year) The traffic analysis considered 2020 as the opening year for obtaining funding, completing design and environmental documentation, acquiring necessary right-of-way (ROW) and permits, and completing construction on selected improvements. Year 2040 was identified as the design year based on available land use and traffic forecasts. Other important assumptions are as follows: •
SRTC board-approved improvements are assumed in the 2020 and 2040 models. These include a number of Spokane Transit Authority (STA) projects, such as the High Performance Transit (HPT) Network. The model also includes the WSDOT East Region regionally significant projects. See Appendix PP1-A for a list of the Horizon 2040 Regional Significant Projects.
•
The 2020 base conditions model includes the effects of funded improvements to the regional transit system, such as the planned West Plains Transit Center and park and ride lots.
The 2040 models assumed that the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project (three roundabouts and revised diamond interchange) was in place. This project is not currently completely funded and is not assumed to be by 2020. See Policy Point 2 for the proposed roundabouts from WSDOT’s I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project. The analysis of the base conditions represents the operating conditions of the West Plains Transit Center without the proposed flyer stops along I-90. The base conditions for 2020 and 2040 provide a comparison for the Proposed Build Alternative at opening and design year. Further information about the base conditions traffic volumes for this project is summarized in Appendix PP3-A. •
It is important to understand that this particular IJR is designed to discuss the operation of the West Plains Transit Center with or without the flyer stops. The issues related to the traffic operation of the ramp terminal intersections were addressed in the PP3 - 3
2013 WSDOT Final Value Engineering Study Report – I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements and will be also addressed through the Spokane County required TIA report.
2020 Base Conditions Transit Travel Times By 2020, the West Plains Transit Center will be open for operations. Bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area will be re-routed to serve the new transit center and riders will be able to transfer to the Cheney/Eastern Washington University express bus. Without the flyer stops, these express buses must exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center. This re-routing will increase the express bus travel time by approximately 13 to 17 minutes, assuming the ramp intersections remain stop controlled. For comparison purposes the following travel time analysis is based on the existing travel demand model for travel through the study area from the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange, to the transit center via local streets to and from I-90 and continue to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange. These 2020 peak hour travel times are: • •
Eastbound AM Peak Hour Westbound AM Peak Hour
20.1 min. 18.2 min.
• •
Eastbound PM Peak Hour Westbound PM Peak Hour
22.9 min. 20.3 min.
2020 Base Conditions Traffic Analyses The 2020 (opening Year) conditions were analyzed assuming current intersection controls, no flyer stops, and without the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) proposed by WSDOT. The traffic operations analysis evaluated the freeway and intersection performance for 2020 conditions in the study area. Freeway Operations: Table 3.3 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour results of the freeway LOS analysis for I-90 Freeway. LOS operations are measured by the density of traffic in passenger cars per mile per lane during the AM and PM peak hours. During the AM and PM peak hour, all freeway segments operate at LOS C or better. Table 3.3 2020 Base Conditions Freeway Levels of Service Location
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 904
AM Peak Hour
Type
LOS I-90, Westbound
PM Peak Hour
Density
LOS
Density
Diverge
A
5.1
B
10.8
I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
B
12.0
B
16.7
I-90 WB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
10.8
B
16.2
I-90 WB, under SR 902
Basic
A
10.4
B
14.5
Diverge
A
8.6
B
14.5
Basic
B
14.3
C
19.2
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
I-90, Eastbound I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
B
14.6
B
11.7
Diverge
B
11.0
A
7.5
I-90 EB, under SR 902
Basic
B
12.6
A
9.5
I-90 EB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
16.2
B
13.4
I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Basic
B
17.2
B
14.6
I-90 EB, off-ramp to SR 902
1 Density: vehicle/lane/mile
Intersections: Table 3.4 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours. The LOS at each intersection is determined by average control and queue delays per vehicle in seconds. PP3 - 4
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Under 2020 base conditions, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS F in both the AM and PM peak hour. Intersection improvements, such as signals or roundabouts are needed to improve operations, as proposed by WSDOT. The other 2 intersections would operate at LOS B or better. Table 3.4 2020 Base Conditions Intersection LOS Summary Traffic Control
No.
Intersection
1
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
2
WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
3
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
AW
4 5
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
AM Peak Hour EB
WB
PM Peak Hour
NB
SB
Total
EB
A/0
A/3.7
F/481
F/710
F/177
A/2
A/0
F/177
B/10.3
B/12.2
B/11.5
B/10.7
B/10.9
TW
A/0
A/2.8
A/8.8
A/0
TW
C/16.5
F/204
A/0.1
A/1.8
F/481
WB
NB
SB
Total
A/0
A/3.9
F/710
F/223
A/2.3
A/0
F/223
B/13.1
B/12.9
C/17.6
B/12.8
B/14
A/8.8
A/0
A/5.8
A/9
B/13.1
B/13.1
F/204
B/11.8
F/1119
A/0.1
A/1.5
F/1119
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming %HV=10%
2040 Base Conditions Transit Travel Times By 2040, the West Plains Transit Center will have been in operation for several years. Bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area have been re-routed to serve the new transit center and riders will be able to transfer to the Cheney/Eastern Washington University express bus. Without the flyer stops, these express buses must exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center. This re-routing will increase the express bus travel time by approximately 18 to 38 minutes, assuming the ramp intersections remain stop controlled. For comparison purposes the following travel time analysis is based on the existing travel demand model for travel through the study area from the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange, to the transit center via local streets to and from I-90 and continue to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange. These 2040 peak hour travel times are: •
Eastbound AM Peak Hour Westbound AM Peak Hour
34.2 min. 22.7 min.
• •
Eastbound PM Peak Hour Westbound PM Peak Hour
43.1 min. 24.9 min.
If the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project (3 roundabouts and revised diamond interchange) would be constructed before 2040, the LOS on the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections may be improved, as well as the travel times for the bus service. Without the flyer stop, the express buses exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access the transit center, the re-routing will increase the express bus travel time by approximately 8 to 11 minutes. These 2040 peak hour travel times from the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange, to the transit center via local streets to and from I-90 and continue to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange with the roundabouts are: • •
Eastbound AM Peak Hour Westbound AM Peak Hour
12.8 min. 14.9 min.
• •
Eastbound PM Peak Hour Westbound PM Peak Hour
13.2 min. 15.8 min.
2040 Base Conditions Traffic Analyses When the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project (three roundabouts and revised diamond interchange) is constructed; it is expected the LOS at the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections will be improved significantly. To better understand the traffic operations of the current facility at the design year, two different base conditions reviews are conducted: •
without the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) PP3 - 5
with the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) proposed by WSDOT
•
Freeway Operations With or Without Roundabouts: Table 3.5 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour results of the freeway LOS analysis for I-90 using the HCM procedures. During the AM and PM peak hour, all freeway segments operate at LOS C or better. LOS operations are measured by the density of traffic in passenger cars per mile per lane during the AM and PM peak hours. Table 3.5 2040 Base Conditions Freeway Levels of Service Location
Type
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 904
AM Peak Hour LOS Density I-90, Westbound
PM Peak Hour LOS Density
Diverge
A
6.8
B
14.6
I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
B
13.4
C
19.9
I-90 WB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
12.4
B
19.4
I-90 WB, Under SR 902
Basic
B
11.6
B
16.6
Diverge
B
12.3
B
17.3
B
17.3
C
21.9
I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
Basic
I-90, Eastbound I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904
Basic
B
17.9
B
13.6
Diverge
B
15
A
9.8
I-90 EB, Under SR 902
Basic
B
14.6
B
11.0+
I-90 EB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
18.7
B
16.4
I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Basic
C
19.6
B
I-90 EB, off-ramp to SR 902
17.6 1
Density: vehicle/lane/mile
Intersections without WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement Project Table 3.6 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours, without the WSDOT I90/Medical Lake Improvement project. Under 2040 base conditions, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS F in both AM and PM peak hour without the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project. The other two intersections would operate at LOS C or better. Table 3.6 2040 Base Conditions Intersection LOS, without I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project No 1 2 3 4 5
Intersection EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Traffic Control TW
AM Peak Hour EB
WB
NB
SB
Total
EB
A/0
A/4
F/1734
F/2445
F/340
A/1.5
A/0
F/340
F/1734
TW
PM Peak Hour WB
NB
SB
Total
A/0
A/4.8
F/2445
F/371
A/2.8
A/0
F/371
AW
B/11.4
B/13.2
B/12.2
B/11.6
B/11.9
B/14.3
B/14.4
C/19.7
B/14.4
C/15.5
TW
A/0
A/2.9
A/8.8
A/0
A/8.8
A/0
A/5.4
A/9.1
B/13.7
B/13.7
TW
C/20.7
F/738
A/0
A/1.5
F/738
B/12.3
F/5741
A/0.1
A/1.1
F/2182
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming %HV=10%
PP3 - 6
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Intersections with WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement Project Table 3.7 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours, with the WSDOT I90/Medical Lake Improvement project. Under 2040 base conditions with the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS A in both the AM and PM peak hour. The other two intersections would operate at LOS C or better. Table 3.7 2040 Base Conditions Intersection LOS Summary, with I-90/Medical Lake Improvement Project No
Intersection
Traffic Control
1
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
RA
2
WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
RA
3
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
AW
4
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
5
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
AM Peak Hour EB
WB
PM Peak Hour
NB
SB
Total
EB
A/9.5
A4.6
A/8.6
B/13.8
A/8.3
A/3.7
A/7.6
A/6.7
B/11.4
B/13.2
B/12.2
B/11.6
B/11.9
TW
A/0
A/2.9
A/8.8
A/0
RA
A/0.6
A/6.0
A/3.6
B/16.3
WB
NB
SB
Total
A/9.8
A/4.9
A/8
A/8.5
A/3.6
A/9.5
A/7.8
B/14.3
B/14.4
C/19.7
B/14.4
C/15.5
A/8.8
A/0
A/5.4
A/9.1
B/13.7
B/13.7
A/3.0
A/0.8
A/9.4
A/4.1
A/4.7
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming %HV=10%
Traffic Operational Analyses – Build Alternatives This IJR evaluates the proposed build alternatives as recommended by the Technical Committee and approved by the Core Stakeholder Group and the STA Board for the opening year and design year periods. These build alternatives include the following three options: 1. Express buses using a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and a new westbound median flyer stop. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound lanes to the westbound median flyer stop. See Build Alternative 2 outlined in Policy Point 2. 2. Express buses using a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and a new westbound flyer stop adjacent to the westbound on-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound and westbound lanes to the westbound flyer stop. See Build Alternative 3A outlined in Policy Point 2. 3. Express buses using a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and a new westbound flyer stop adjacent to I-90 west of the W. Aero Road undercrossing. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound and westbound lanes to the westbound flyer stop. See Build Alternative 3B outlined in Policy Point 2.
Forecasting Travel Demand for Build Alternatives The SRTC travel demand models were used to provide the base condition travel demand within the study area. These models assume that both inbound and outbound express buses are travelling on Mainline I-90 at the Medical Lake Interchange. For each build alternative, buses routing adjustments were manually entered to account for predicated volume shifts based on the access differences between build alternatives. When the West Plains Transit Center opens for operation, bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area will be re-routed to serve the new transit center. The STA forecasts that there will be five outbound transit trips and five inbound transit trips servicing the transit center during the AM and PM peak hours for 2020 and 2040. These trips were re-routed among the build alternatives. For example, Build Alternative
PP3 - 7
2 assumes the median flyer stop with pedestrian bridge, so the inbound trips were re-routed away from the mainline I-90 to the westbound flyer stop. 2020 and 2040 AM and PM peak hour forecast for the freeway and freeway ramps for the Alternative 1 – No Build and three build alternatives were analyzed with a maximum of five bus trips (four STA Route 66 bus trips and one STA Route 63 bus trip) being re-routed, the differences in traffic volumes on the freeway and freeway ramps between the build alternatives are minor. 2020 and 2040 AM and PM peak hour traffic assignments at the various intersections for the Alternative 1 – No Build and three build alternatives are adjusted with the re-routing of five bus trips. With only this slight change, the differences in turning movements at the ramp intersections and local intersections are minor. 2020 and 2040 traffic volumes for this project are contained in Appendix PP3-A.
Transit Travel Time for Build Alternatives By 2020, the West Plains Transit Center will be open for operation. Bus service from Airway Heights, Spokane International Airport, and the Medical Lake area will be re-routed to serve the new transit center and riders will be able to transfer to the Cheney/Eastern Washington University express bus along I-90. By 2040, WSDOT may complete their I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project (three roundabouts and revised diamond interchange), the travel times for the bus service through the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections may be improved. Table 3.8 provides the transit travel time comparison among the build alternatives for the opening year 2020 and the design year 2040. For comparison purposes the travel time analysis is based on the travel demand model, for travel through the study area from the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange to the SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange. Table 3.8 2020 and 2040 Transit Travel Time (in minutes) 2020 (Opening Year) Location
Peak Hour
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3A
2040 (Design Year) Alternative 3B
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
I-90, Westbound Without WSDOT Roundabouts With WSDOT Roundabouts*
AM
18.2
6.4
11.4
6.4
22.7
6.5
15.7
6.5
PM
20.3
6.5
13.0
6.5
24.9
6.7
17.4
6.7
AM
-
-
-
-
14.9
6.5
7.8
6.5
PM
-
-
-
-
15.8
6.7
8.1
6.7
34.2
29.2
29.2
29.2
I-90, Eastbound Without WSDOT Roundabouts
AM
20.1
14.2
14.2
14.2
PM
22.9
16.4
16.4
16.4
43.1
37.7
37.7
37.7
With WSDOT Roundabouts*
AM
-
-
-
-
12.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
-
-
-
-
13.2
7.8
7.8
7.8
PM
* WSDOT interchange improvements (roundabouts) are planned to be constructed by 2040. Travel time with roundabout for 2020 was not analyzed.
As shown in Table 3.8, Build Alternative 2 and Build Alternative 3B have the shortest transit travel time during the AM and PM peak hours in 2020 and 2040. Something to note is that although westbound busses travel a greater distance, and through three intersections, to reach the transit center then eastbound busses, the travel times are faster. This is because the ramp terminals are stop controlled, but the movement south on Aero Road is free flowing. Additionally, the westbound ramp terminal at SR 902 / I-90 operates more efficiently than the eastbound ramp terminal at SR 902/I-90 as can be seen in Tables 3.2, 3.4 and 3.6
PP3 - 8
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
2020 Build Alternative Traffic Analyses The 2020 (opening Year) conditions analysis reviewed the traffic operations of the build alternatives. The traffic operations analysis evaluated the freeway and intersection performance for 2020 opening conditions in the study area. Freeway Operations: Table 3.9 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour results of the freeway LOS analysis for I-90 freeway. Because there are only minor variations of traffic volumes on I-90 among the build alternatives, the LOS for each build alternative remains the same. During the AM and PM peak hour, among all of the build alternatives, all freeway segments operate at LOS C or better. Table 3.9 2020 Freeway Levels of Service for Build Alternatives AM Peak Hour Location
Type
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
PM Peak Hour
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
I-90, Westbound I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 904 I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 WB, on-ramp from SR 902 I-90 WB, Under SR 902 I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
Diverge
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
Basic
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Merge
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Basic
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
Diverge
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
Basic
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
C
I-90, Eastbound I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 EB, off-ramp to SR 902
Basic
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Diverge
B
B
B
B
A
A
A
A
I-90 EB, Under SR 902
Basic
B
B
B
B
A
A
A
A
I-90 EB, on-ramp from SR 902
Merge
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Basic
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Intersections: Table 3.10 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours. The LOS at each intersection is determined by average control and queue delays per vehicle in seconds. Because there are minor variations in traffic turning volumes at ramp intersections and local streets among the build alternatives, the LOS for each build alternative remains the same as the Alternative 1 – No Build. For opening year 2020, the I90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS F in both the AM and PM peak hour. The other two intersections would operate at LOS B or better.
PP3 - 9
Table 3.10 2020 Intersection Levels of Service for Build Alternatives AM Peak Hour No.
1 2 3 4 5
Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Traffic Control1
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3a
TW
F/481
F/362.5
TW
F/177
AW
PM Peak Hour Alternative 3b
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3a
Alternative 3b
F/362.5
F/362.5
F/710
F/508.3
F/508.3
F/508.3
F/156
F/177
F/156
F/223
F/212
F/223
F/212
B/10.9
B/10.9
B/10.9
B/10.9
B/14
B/14
B/14
B/14
TW
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
B/13.1
B/13.1
B/13.1
B/13.1
TW
F/204
F/204
F/204
F/204
F/1119
F/1119
F/1119
F/1119
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection
2040 Build Alternative Traffic Analyses When the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project (three roundabouts and revised diamond interchange) is constructed; it is expected that the LOS on the ramp intersections and adjacent local intersections will be improved. To better understand the traffic operations of the build alternatives at the design year, the same two conditions used to analyze the Alternative 1 – No Build are also analyzed for the build alternatives:
without the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) with the ramp terminal improvements (roundabouts) proposed by WSDOT
Freeway Operations With or Without the Roundabouts: If the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project were completed, it would improve the traffic operations at the ramp terminal intersections, but would have insignificant impact to freeway operations. The Level of Service for the freeway operations would remain the same with or without the ramp terminal improvements. Table 3.11 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour results of the freeway LOS analysis for the I-90 freeway. LOS operations are measured by the density of traffic in passenger cars per mile per lane during the AM and PM peak hours. During the AM and PM peak hour, all freeway segments for all build alternatives operate at LOS C or better.
PP3 - 10
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Table 3.11 2040 Freeway Levels of Service for Build Alternatives AM Peak Hour Location
Type
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
PM Peak Hour
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
I-90, Westbound I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 904 I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 WB, on-ramp from SR 902 I-90 WB, Under SR 902 I-90 WB, off-ramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
Diverge
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
Basic
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
C
Merge
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Basic
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Diverge
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Basic
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
C
I-90, Eastbound I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 EB, off-ramp to SR 902 I-90 EB, Under SR 902 I-90 EB, on-ramp from SR 902 I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Basic
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Diverge
B
B
B
B
A
A
A
A
Basic
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Merge
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Basic
C
C
C
C
B
B
B
B
Intersections without WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement Project Table 3.12 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours, without the WSDOT I90/Medical Lake Improvement project. For 2040 build alternatives without the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS F in both the AM and PM peak hour. The other two intersections would operate at LOS C or better. Table 3.12 2040 Intersection Levels of Service for Build Alternative, Without Roundabouts AM Peak Hour No.
1 2 3 4 5
Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Traffic Control1
PM Peak Hour
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3a
Alternative 3b
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3a
Alternative 3b
TW
F/1734
F/1355
F/1355
F/1355
F/2445
F/1855
F/1855
F/1855
TW
F/340
F/320
F/340
F/320
F/371
F/354
F/371
F/354
AW
B/11.9
B/11.9
B/11.9
B/11.9
C/15.5
C/15.5
C/15.5
C/15.5
TW
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
B/13.7
B/13.7
B/13.7
B/13.7
TW
F/738
F/738
F/738
F/738
F/2182
F/2182
F/2182
F/2182
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection
PP3 - 11
Intersections with WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement Project Table 3.13 summarizes the intersection control delay and LOS conditions for the AM and PM peak hours, with the WSDOT I90/Medical Lake Improvement project. For the 2040 build alternatives with the WSDOT I-90/Medical Lake Improvement project, the I-90 ramp intersections and the Hayford Road/Medical Lake Road intersection would operate at LOS A in both the AM and PM peak hour. The other two intersections would operate at LOS C or better. Table 3.13 2040 Intersection Levels of Service for Build Alternative, with roundabouts AM Peak Hour No.
Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
1 2 3 4 5
Traffic Control1
PM Peak Hour
Alternative 1 Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3a
Alternative 3b
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3a
Alternative 3b
RA
A/8.6
A/8.6
A/8.6
A/8.6
A/8
A/8
A/8
A/8
RA
A/6.7
A/6.7
A/6.7
A/6.7
A/7.8
A/7.8
A/7.8
A/7.8
AW
B/11.9
B/11.9
B/11.9
B/11.9
C/15.5
C/15.5
C/15.5
C/15.5
TW
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
A/8.8
B/13.7
B/13.7
B/13.7
B/13.7
RA
A/3.0
A/3.0
A/3.0
A/3.0
A/4.7
A/4.7
A/4.7
A/4.7
1. S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Two Way stop intersection becomes roundabout under "2040 with Roundabout" option
Weave Analysis for Build Alternative 2 Build Alternative 2 has westbound express buses stopping at a new westbound median flyer stop and a new eastbound flyer stop on the eastbound off-ramp at the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange is used by eastbound express buses. A pedestrian bridge would extend from the transit center over the I-90 eastbound lanes to the westbound median flyer stop. There was a concern about buses being able to accelerate from a median flyer stop located immediately west of the I-90/SR 902 Interchange and exit at the I-90/SR 904 Interchange to the west. To evaluate this concern, a weave analysis was conducted for the westbound I-90 segment between the proposed West Plains Transit Center median flyer stop and SR 904 off-ramp, with the methodology defined by the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, assuming 2040 as the design year. The analysis shows that:
During the AM peak hour, the freeway weave section operates at LOS B During the PM peak hour, the freeway weave section operates at LOS C
This analysis shows that a bus exiting the median flyer stop has approximately 4,360 feet after entering the freeway mainline, to change lanes and exit the freeway at SR 904. The section of I-90 between the proposed median flyer stop and the off-ramp to SR 904 is on a tangent section with level terrain. Based on these conditions and the volumes presented in the analysis, the weave distance provided is adequate to safely make the maneuver in all weather conditions. The weave analysis detail is summarized in the I-90/SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange Justification Report – Weave Analysis Technical Memorandum.
PP3 - 12
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Collision Analysis – Base Conditions A five-year collision analysis was conducted along I-90 from SR 904/Four Lakes Interchange (Exit 270, MP 270.55) to Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange (Exit 276, MP 276.32), including ramps and cross streets within the study area, as illustrated in Figure 3.1 and 3.2. Collisions varied throughout the corridor, with causes ranging from driver inattention, to speeding, following too closely, and other factors. The collision analysis used five year data and classified the collisions by type and severity. Overall, the collision rate on I-90 through the project area (143.7 per MVM) is below the statewide (175.9 per MVM, 2012 Washington State Annual Collision Summary) and Spokane County (171.2 per MVM, 2012 Washington State Annual Collision Summary) collision rates. Based on WSDOT’s safety assessment, there are no Collision Analysis Corridors (CACs), Collision Analysis Locations (CALs), or Intersection Analysis Locations (IALs) along this section of I-90. The collision total throughout the study area varies on a yearly basis, with the average of 35 mainline collisions per year with an additional 7 collisions per year on ramps and cross streets. This is a total of 42 collisions per year. Figure 3.1 Number of I-90 Collisions by Years
Collisions
I-90 Collision Summary By Year (MP 270 to MP 276) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Ramps and Cross Streets I-90 2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Year
Figure 3.2 I-90 Mainline Collisions by Type
Collisions by Type on I-90 Mainline MP 270 to MP 276 January 2009 to December 2013
Vehicle Overturn, 33 Sideswipe, 16
Fixed Object, 68 Rear End, 44 Other, 39
PP3 - 13
Types of Collision Occurring Between January 2009 and December 2013, there were 200 collisions reported along this section of I-90. These collisions are generally grouped according to type. For this analysis the following types are used: • • • • •
Rear-end collisions; Overturn collisions; Fixed object collisions; Sideswipe collisions; and Other collisions.
The Other Collision category includes vehicle/animal related collisions, and those collision types are not identified. Figure 3.2 shows a breakdown of the collision types and number along I-90 mainline. This collision chart clearly indicates that fixed object and sideswipe collisions accounted for nearly 56 percent of the mainline collisions. Contributing Circumstances for Collisions Driver contributing circumstances for collisions (as reported by the responding police officer) along this section of I-90 are summarized on Figure 3.3. Figure 3.3 I-90 Driver Contributing Circumstances for Collisions Other, 13 Operating Defective Equipment, 14
Under Influence of Alcohol / Drugs, 11
Apparently Asleep, 6
Did Not Grant RW to Vehicle, 11 Driver Distractions, 9
None Listed, 20 Exceeding Reas. Safe Speed, 89 Inattention, 10
Follow Too Closely, 21
Drivers who are exceeding reasonable speed, following too closely, inattention, and driver distractions combine for 63 percent of the mainline collisions, while drivers operating defective equipment accounted for another 7 percent of mainline collisions. About five percent of the I-90 mainline collisions involve alcohol or drugs. Severity of Collisions As can be observed from Figure 3.4, property damage only collisions comprise 63 percent of all collisions. There was only one collision involving a fatality over the five year period along I-90 within the study area. Overall, less than 20 percent of the collisions involved serious injury, evident injury, or a fatality. These median percentages of property damage or possible injury collisions are characteristic in areas of non-congested traffic throughout the interstate system.
PP3 - 14
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Figure 3.4 I-90 5 Year Collisions by Severity (January 2009 to December 2013) Dead at Scene, 1
Unknown, 2
Serious Injury, 5 Evident Injury, 27
Possible Injury, 29
Property Damage Only, 111
ISATe (Enhanced Interchange Safety Analysis Tool) Analysis For this analysis, the ISATe was performed to determine if the existing safety performance analysis is normal for the existing highway configuration. The existing ISATe analysis included comparing the collision types and severities between the observed collisions and model outputs from January 2009 to December 2013. As can be observed from Table 3.14, the ISATe analysis results were consistent with the existing collision data. No over dispersions of collision type or severities were observed. Table 3.14 ISATe Projected Collision vs Observed Collision for Study Area January 2009 to December 2013
Collision Type
Multi Vehicle
Single Vehicle
ISATe Collisions
Observed Collisions
Head on
1
3
Right Angle
2
15
Rear End
23
40
Other
17
2
Animal
5
9
Fixed Object
56
56
34
46
5 Year Total
Other
138
171
5 Year Average
28
35
Collision Analysis – Build Alternatives The collision rate along this section of I-90 is expected to increase over the next twenty years without improvements due to:
Increases in traffic volumes which will result in increased congestion; Queue back-ups along off-ramps will extend onto the I-90 mainline, resulting in traffic stopping on the interstate; and Drivers will have a greater tendency to shift lanes to avoid stopping which will increase sideswipe and rear-end collisions.
As stated in Policy Point 1, the purpose of the West Plains Transit Center is to expand connectivity to the West Plains communities and improve transit travel times to and from Cheney and Eastern Washington University. By incorporating flyer stops along I-90 in the West Plains area, there is no need for express buses to exit I-90 and travel on surface streets to access PP3 - 15
the transit center. Because there would be fewer bus trips on the ramps, at the ramp termini and through the nearby intersections with the flyer stops, there may be a decrease in the overall interchange collision rate, as compared to no flyer stops. Based on the FHWA Highway Safety Manual, the ISATe models were performed to predict the safety performance of the future Alternative 1 – No Build and the build alternatives. The predicted safety performance indicators include types and severities of collisions that contribute to the safety impacts of the freeway and the adjacent local streets for 2020 and 2040. Table 3.15 2020 and 2040 ISATe Collision Analysis for Build Alternatives 2020 Collision Type
Multi Vehicle
Single Vehicle Total
Head on Right Angle Rear End Other Animal Fixed Object Other
2040
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
Alternative 1 – Base Conditions
Alternative 2
Alternative 3A
Alternative 3B
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
13
13
13
13
15
15
15
15
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
36
36
36
36
42
42
42
42
Because the build alternatives only provide improvements for express bus access to the West Plains Transit Center, the safety impact to the interchange is minimal. As expected and can be observed from Table 3.15, the ISATe analysis results demonstrated that the build alternatives do not have a significant adverse impact on the safety of the freeway or the adjacent local street system in the study area, as compared to Alternative 1 – No Build in 2040.
PP3 - 16
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Policy Point 4: Access Connections and Design Will the proposal provide fully directional interchanges connected to public streets or roads, spaced appropriately, and designed to full design level geometric control criteria?
Summary The proposed freeway flyer stops are designed to provide fast and convenient transit service, connecting the West Plains and Medical Lake area with downtown Spokane, the City of Cheney, Eastern Washington University and the Spokane International Airport, through the West Plains Transit Center, located at the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange with Interstate 90 (I-90). With this project, the Spokane Transit Authority (STA) is able to efficiently operate express buses along I-90 and minimize time on local roads and in the transit center. By routing buses through the flyer stops, buses will be off I-90 for less than two minutes as compared to the 8 to 11 minutes for buses using local streets to access the transit center. The combined flyer stops and bus exclusive ramps are designed to meet full design standards, allow pedestrians to move quickly and safely to meet express buses, and reduce travel time for all users. With the conceptual level design completed, no design deviations have been identified for the eastbound off-ramp flyer stop. A shoulder width deviation may be required for the median flyer stop, but additional survey information is required to determine the need. The proposed flyer stops do not alter the existing interchange spacing, which exceed the rural interchange spacing requirements. Further information about the alternative selection for this project is summarized in the Alternative Review and Selection Technical Memorandum attached as Appendix PP4-A.
Conceptual Layout and Signing Plans The conceptual layouts and signing plans for the proposed flyer stops connected to STA West Plains Transit Center project are illustrated on Preferred Alternative Plan Sheet 1 through 5 attached as Appendix PP4-B. These conceptual layouts show the proposed flyer stops, bus ramps, and signing plans to direct buses/pedestrians through the interchange. The flyer stops and exclusive bus ramps will be designed to full design standards including lane and shoulder width, and vertical and horizontal alignments. The median flyer stop provides westbound express transit service and the eastbound off-ramp flyer stop provides eastbound transit service to the STA West Plains Transit Center. These conceptual plans will be further developed during preliminary design as part of the environmental documentation phase of the project.
Present and Future Interchange Spacing The proposed flyer stops associated with STA’s West Plains Transit Center project maintains the existing interchange spacing. The distance between the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and the SR 904/Four Lakes/Cheney Interchange to the west is approximately 2.26 miles. The distance between the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange and the Geiger Boulevard/Grove Road Interchange to the east is approximately 3.51 miles. The interchange spacing for the West Plains Transit Center project exceeds the minimum spacing. The distance between the gore areas for adjacent ramps along westbound mainline I-90 from the proposed transit only ramp to the westbound off-ramp at the SR 904/Four Lakes/Cheney Interchange is greater than 4,300 feet, which exceeds the minimum requirements of 2,000 feet (WSDOT Design Manual Page 1360-7). The distance between gore areas for the existing eastbound on-ramp at the SR 904/Four Lakes/Cheney Interchange to the modified eastbound off-ramp at the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange along the eastbound mainline is greater than 10,000 feet and also surpass the minimum requirements. PP4 - 1
Policy Point 5: Land Use and Transportation Plans Is the proposed access point revision compatible with all land use and transportation plans?
Introduction In order to assess the compatibility of the West Plains Transit Center Interchange Justification Report (IJR) with existing land use and transportation plans for the area, the following documents were reviewed: • • • • •
Connect Spokane – A Comprehensive Plan for Public Transportation (revised 2014) I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements (2013) Spokane County Comprehensive Plan (2012) Horizon 2040 – Spokane Metropolitan Transportation Plan (2013) The Washington Transportation Plan (WTP 2007 – 2026, and WTP 2030) (revised 2010)
For this IJR analysis, the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) travel demand models are used to provide a basis for the analysis years and periods. The SRTC model includes existing year land uses for the existing base calibration and analysis, as well as future year land uses in accordance with approved zoning classifications and Office of Financial Management (OFM) development guidelines. To be consistent with current transportation planning assumptions, these models also include the existing land use plus committed projects for the region from the 4-year Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) and Horizon 2040.
Connect Spokane – A Comprehensive Plan for Public Transportation The Interstate 90 (I-90) express flier stops with pedestrian connections to the West Plains Transit Center are included in the Spokane Transit Authority’s 2014 Comprehensive Plan for Public Transportation. The purpose is to expand connectivity to the West Plains communities and improve travel times to and from the City of Cheney and Eastern Washington University by providing improved high-quality, higher performance, cost effective transit services that address mobility needs for an expanding population and employment base west of Spokane. Multi-modal transportation services will be enhanced through: • • • •
Improving connectivity between cities and the West Plains area; Providing easy and fast connections to High Performance Transit (HPT) service along the I-90 corridor; Improving transit access to residential and employment areas adjacent to Exit 272 by providing convenient transfers between local and express bus services; and Reducing congestion by providing an attractive alternative for single occupant vehicle (SOV) users.
I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements and Washington Transportation Plan It is important to understand that this particular IJR is designed to discuss the operation of the West Plains Transit Center with or without the proposed express bus flyer stops with pedestrian connections. The issues related to the traffic operation of the ramp terminal intersections were addressed in the 2013 WSDOT Final Value Engineering Study Report – I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements. The proposed express bus flyer stops with pedestrian connections are consistent with the improvements listed the I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements project and the Washington Transportation Plan, and does not adversely affect these plans.
PP5 - 1
Spokane County Comprehensive Plan In 2012 Spokane County Comprehensive Plan, the West Plains Transit Center and surrounding area is designated as one of the Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) in Spokane County. A primary basis for the UGA requirement is the economical and efficient provision of public services, which includes the public transit service. The Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Chapter 2 also indicates the land use for the West Plains Transit Center area as “Regional Commercial Area”, surrounded by light industrial and low density residential areas. This “mixed-use” area is characterized as: • • • •
Housing and employment densities to support frequent transit service; Public transit connections to other Centers and Corridors; Safe, attractive bus stops and pedestrian and bicycle ways; and Buildings which front on wide sidewalks with attractive landscaping, benches and frequent transit stops.
The proposed express bus flyer stops with pedestrian connections are consistent with the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan, and enhances the Plan by providing fast and efficient transit service to the area.
Horizon 2040 – Spokane Metropolitan Transportation Plan Horizon 2040 is the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) for the Spokane metropolitan planning area developed by SRTC. It is a plan for an integrated, accessible, multi-modal transportation system to safely and efficiently move people and goods through the year 2040. The plan identifies a list of projects and programs expected to be implemented between today and the year 2040. Horizon 2040 also includes a list of unfunded transportation needs that are important to the region should additional funding become available. The I-90 express flier stops with pedestrian connections to the West Plains Transit Center are included in the Horizon 2040 and listed as a short-term regionally significant project (described as the West Plains Transit Center – Project 9).
Summary The proposed express bus flyer stops with pedestrian connections to the West Plains Transit Center are consistent with the applicable land use and transportation plans.
PP5 - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Policy Point 6: Future Interchanges Is the proposed access point revision compatible with a comprehensive network plan? Is the proposal compatible with other known new access points and known revisions to existing points?
Introduction There is no comprehensive network plan for this section of Interstate 90 (I-90) and there are no new interchanges proposed within five miles of the I-90/SR 902 Interchange. The interchange improvements proposed as part of the West Plains Transit Center project are compatible with Connect Spokane – A Comprehensive Plan for Public Transportation, as described in Policy Point 5.
Future WSDOT Improvements WSDOT is currently considering options to construct improvements to the I-90/SR 902 Interchange in order to keep up with anticipated future demand. In January 2013, WSDOT preformed a value engineering (VE) study, I-90/SR-902 Interchange Improvements (February 2013), identifying future improvements to the interchange. The project, which is in the planning phase, is currently unfunded. The preferred improvements identified in the VE study include three new roundabouts – one at each of the ramp terminals and one at the intersection of W. Aero Road and W. Geiger Boulevard (see Figure 6.1). The I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements project would include minor re-alignments of the ramp terminals at the roundabouts. The West Plains Transit Center median flyer stop and eastbound off-ramp stop are not impacted by the ramp terminal reconstruction proposed as part of the I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements project.
Summary To date, there are no proposed new access points planned from I-90/SR-904 (west) to I-90/South Grove Road (east) within the project vicinity. The preferred alternative for the West Plains Transit Center improvement project is compatible with the WSDOT I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvement project described above.
PP6 - 1
Figure 6.1 I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvements
PP6 - 2
Draft Final | Interchange Justification Report
Policy Point 7: Coordination Are all coordinating projects and actions programmed and funded?
Funding Spokane Transit Authority (STA) has committed to building the West Plains Transit Center park and ride facility, regardless of the alternative median access flyer stop or the alternative ramp access stops. The Transit Center facility may route buses on local roads, rather than I-90. STA has already surveyed the lot for purchase and after the appraisals are approved by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), STA will move forward with the purchase of the parcel. STA was awarded a $951,500 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Grant from the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) in July 2013. Combined with $148,500 in STA local funds, the initial project budget was $1.1 million for preliminary design. In June 2015, STA received a Regional Mobility Grant from Washington State in the amount of $8.7 million to complete engineering design and partially fund construction of the transit center. $1.7 million will be available in the 2015-2017 biennium and $7 million will be available in the 2017-2019 biennium. STA is currently seeking the remaining funding to complete the project.
Project Coordination The Interchange Justification report (IJR) requires the participation of various stakeholders, including Federal and State government, local agencies and private organizations. The results of the IJR enable the project stakeholders to assess options and opportunities to improve the transportation system within the project area. The below listed lead agencies were consulted during the course of the IJR development:
Spokane Transit Authority Federal Transit Administration Federal Highway Administration Washington State Department of Transportation Spokane Regional Transportation Council Spokane County Spokane International Airport
An open house was held in late March 2015. The public comments were collected in order to help move the project forward. As discussed in the previous chapter, WSDOT has plans to improve the SR 902/Medical Lake Interchange. The plan includes the construction of 3 roundabouts; one at each of the ramp terminals and one at the intersection of W. Aero Road and re-aligned W. Geiger Boulevard. Although it is not directly related to the alternative median access flyer stop or the alternative ramp access stops, WSDOT’s project will provide acceptable levels of service for the SR 902/Medical Lake interchange and provide the necessary infrastructure to improve the traffic flow to and from the West Plain Transit Center.
PP7 - 1
Policy Point 8: Environmental Process What is the status of the proposal’s environmental processes? This section should be something more than just a status report of the environmental process; it should be a brief summary of the environmental process.
Environmental Approval and Permitting Process The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in cooperation with the Spokane Transit Authority (STA) plans to complete the environmental phase of the project in 2015. Both NEPA and SEPA documentation will be prepared. For the NEPA documentation, it is assumed that the West Plains Transit Center project will be classified as a Categorical Exclusion (CE). This is based on the proposed action of constructing a new transit facility. There is no known public opposition for the project. Resources with the potential for impact include property, hazardous materials and potentially wetlands. Cultural resources survey and compliance with Section 106 will be completed as part of the environmental process. It can be expected that impacts will not be significant. For SEPA documentation, a separate checklist will be prepared. It is anticipated that the project will be issued a Determination of Non-Significance. Preparation of the NEPA and SEPA documentation will take place in 2015. The NEPA and SEPA documentation will be supported by analysis of the following resources:
Water Resources Wildlife Resources Cultural Resources Air Noise Hazardous Materials Land Use Socio-economic
The following permits and approvals are anticipated:
NEPA Categorical Exclusion SEPA Determination of Non-significance Army Corps of Engineers – Section 404 Permit Section 106 compliance WA Department of Ecology – Section 401 Water Quality Certification WA Department of Ecology – NPDES Construction Permit Spokane County Critical Areas Ordinance – Authorization
PP8 - 1
Appendix Policy Point 1 - A
Appendix PP1-A Table 4.10 Horizon 2040 Short‐Term Regionally Significant Projects 2014 ‐ 2020 Project Number
Project
Description
Jurisdiction
Project Cost (2014 $)
Year of Expenditure Cost
City of Spokane
$6,510,000
$6,510,000
1
Riverside Drive Phase 2
2
North Indian Trail ‐ Kathleen to Barnes Widen to four lanes with center turn lane
City of Spokane
$3,000,000
$3,205,030
3
Barker Rd. Overpass
Reconstruct Barker Rd. to pass over three BNSF tracks and SR 290
City of Spokane Valley
$26,000,000
$29,208,846
4
Bigelow Gulch Rd. Project 2 ‐ urban boundary to East Weile St.
Widen to four lanes with center turn lane
Spokane County
$10,955,000
$12,389,086
5
Bigelow Gulch Rd. Project 3 ‐ East Weile to Jensen
Widen to four lanes with center turn lane
Spokane County
$4,553,518
$4,952,000
6
Bigelow Gulch Rd. Project 4 ‐ Old Argonne Rd to Evergreen Rd
Widen to four lanes with center turn lane
Spokane County
$14,257,569
$14,678,000
7
Spokane County
$6,115,660
$6,296,000
STA
$63,563,718
$71,408,572
9
Bigelow Gulch Rd. Project 4A ‐ Forker Bigelow Gulch overpass at Forker Rd Connector HPTN G2 ‐ Central City Line Construct a Modern Electric Trolleybus from Browne's Addition to West Plains Transit Center Park & ride transit center in the vicinity of I‐90 Exit 272
STA
$11,571,837
$13,000,000
10
Interstate 90 ‐ Medical Lake I/C
Interchange modifications
WSDOT
$25,000,000
$27,634,432
11
Interstate 90 ‐ Geiger I/C
Interchange modifications
WSDOT
$10,000,000
$11,573,445
12
Interstate 90 ‐ Barker Rd I/C
Construct general purpose lanes and replace Barker Rd I/C
WSDOT
$26,500,000
$29,969,036
13
Interstate 90 ‐ Barker I/C Vic. to Harvard I/C Vic. NSC ‐ Spokane River to Francis Ave. Phase 1
Construct general purpose lanes
WSDOT
$32,000,000
$38,856,707
Construct new 4 lane section between Francis and the Spokane River including railroad realignment and Wellesley I/C. Also
WSDOT
$230,000,000
$260,108,613
Interstate 90 ‐ Freya WB Off‐Ramp
Ramp modifications
WSDOT
$3,900,000
$4,136,258
$473,927,300
$533,926,026
8
14 15
Extension of Riverside Dr. from Sherman to Trent & Perry
Subtotal $
Table 4.11 Horizon 2040 Mid‐Term Regionally Significant Projects 2021 – 2030 Project Number
Project
Description
Jurisdiction
Project Cost (2014 $)
Year of Expenditure Cost
16
SR27/SR290 Underpass
Construct underpass for vehicular traffic under BNSF tracks
City of Spokane Valley
$16,000,000
$18,275,802
17
Bigelow Gulch Rd. Project 5 ‐ Forker Connector
Widen Forker from Progress to Bigelow Gulch Rd to four lanes with center turn lane
Spokane County
$10,952,354
$12,353,000
18
Bigelow Gulch Rd. Project 6 ‐ Forker Connector
Spokane County
$8,925,510
$10,195,054
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Valley HPT Corridor Preservation NSC ‐ Spokane River to Francis Phase 2 SR 904/Betz Road to I 90 US 395 from Half Moon Rd. to Stevens Interstate 90 ‐ Henry Road I/C NSC ‐ Trent Ave. to Spokane River NSC ‐ Inerstate 90 North Access NSC ‐ Collector Distributor System
Widen Forker to four lanes with center turn lane from Evergreen to Wellesley, including intersection improvements at Acquire right of way for the future implementation of Construct full interchanges and roadway Phase 2 Construct additional lanes for a five‐lane roadway Construct passing lanes Replace Greenacres I/C with one at Henry Road Construct interchange and roadway for half of facility Construct interchange and roadway for half of facility Reconstruction I‐90 with C/D system Phase 1
STA WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT Subtotal $
$8,754,746 $70,000,000 $18,000,000 $10,000,000 $26,500,000 $155,500,000 $190,000,000 $82,000,000 $596,632,610
$10,000,000 $83,625,191 $21,816,080 $12,755,335 $34,352,039 $204,804,878 $254,190,168 $109,703,125 $772,070,672
Table 4.12 Horizon 2040 Long‐Term Regionally Significant Projects 2031 – 2040 Project Number
Project
Description
Jurisdiction
Project Cost (2014 $)
Year of Expenditure Cost
27
Riverside Drive Phase 3
Design and construct new connecting roadway Sherman to Sprague, along Erie ROW
City of Spokane
$6,000,000
$9,272,675
28
Latah Bridge
Improve capacity/rehabilitate
City of Spokane
$20,000,000
$30,908,918
29
Sullivan Rd. Bridge
Construct new bridge over Trent and BNSF railroad tracks
City of Spokane Valley
$13,300,000
$23,521,511
30 31 32 33
NSC ‐ I 90 North Access Connection US 195 ‐ Hatch Rd. I/C and Meadow NSC ‐ Collector Distributor System NSC ‐ Trent Ave. to Spokane River
Construct interchange and roadway for half of facility Corridor design, right of way and access control, construct Reconstruction I‐90 with C/D system Phase 2 Construct interchange and roadway for half of facility
WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT WSDOT Subtotal
$187,000,000 $71,000,000 $230,000,000 $155,500,000 $682,800,000
$265,712,462 $102,353,373 $341,121,380 $233,857,422 $1,006,747,740
Appendix Policy Point 3 - A
Appendix PP3-A 2014 Existing Turning Movement Summary AM Peak Approach No
1 2 3 4 5
1.
Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Traffic Control
PHF
HV
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
TW
0.92
10%
84
3
57
0
0
0
0
210
230
260
273
0
TW
0.88
10%
0
0
0
174
1
193
79
204
0
0
363
60
AW
0.88
10%
78
5
1
5
3
99
1
179
6
81
68
73
TW
0.79
10%
0
28
1
68
15
0
1
0
52
0
0
0
TW
0.91
10%
1
3
11
90
2
23
6
267
123
64
329
0
S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming Peak Hour %HV=10%
2014 Existing Turning Movement Summary PM Peak Approach No.
1 2 3
4
5
1.
Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Traffic Control
PHF
%HV
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
TW
0.9
10%
94
0
102
0
0
0
0
180
237
189
360
0
TW
0.91
10%
0
0
0
172
1
227
61
221
0
0
383
136
AW
0.92
10%
98
4
5
3
5
122
1
116
4
77
195
79
TW
0.87
10%
0
32
3
72
22
0
3
0
77
0
0
0
TW
0.91
10%
0
0
9
215
4
68
9
266
168
51
292
0
S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming Peak Hour %HV=10%
2020 Base Conditions Turning Movement Summary AM Peak Approach No
1 2 3 4 5
1.
Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Traffic Control
PHF
%HV
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
TW
0.92
10%
152
3
88
0
0
0
0
239
230
307
437
0
TW
0.92
10%
0
0
0
280
1
247
86
310
0
0
468
92
AW
0.92
10%
83
5
1
5
13
122
1
187
6
150
85
183
TW
0.92
10%
0
30
1
76
17
110
1
0
55
0
0
0
TW
0.92
10%
1
3
11
211
0
31
0
475
358
90
449
0
S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming Peak Hour %HV=10%
2020 Base Conditions Turning Movement Summary PM Peak Approach No
Intersection
Traffic Control
PHF
%HV
Eastbound LT
1 2 3 4 5 1.
TH
Westbound RT
LT
TH
RT
Northbound LT
EB Ramp @ TW 0.92 10% 137 0 113 0 0 0 0 SR 902 / I-90 WB Ramp @ TW 0.92 10% 0 0 0 239 1 322 93 SR902 / I-90 Aero Rd @ AW 0.92 10% 211 11 5 3 5 174 1 Westbow Blvd Westbow Blvd TW 0.92 10% 0 35 3 82 24 0 3 @ Hayford Rd Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake TW 0.92 10% 0 0 9 488 4 101 9 Rd S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming Peak Hour %HV=10%
Southbound
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
266
331
348
473
0
327
0
0
588
196
130
4
182
203
91
0
83
110
0
0
517
294
91
577
0
2040 Base Conditions Turning Movement Summary AM Peak Approach No
Intersection
Traffic Control
PHF
%HV
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
1
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
0.92
10%
239
3
137
0
0
0
0
294
195
354
486
0
2
WB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90
TW
0.92
10%
0
0
0
287
1
342
83
454
0
0
558
128
3
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
AW
0.92
10%
86
5
1
5
13
136
1
199
6
200
116
198
4
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
TW
0.92
10%
0
31
1
85
19
113
1
0
59
0
0
0
5
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
TW
0.92
10%
1
3
11
265
0
46
0
599
473
71
522
0
1.
S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming Peak Hour %HV=10%
2040 Base Conditions Turning Movement Summary PM Peak Approach Traffic Control
No
Intersection
1
EB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
TW
0.92
2
WB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90
TW
3
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
4 5
1.
PHF
%HV
Eastbound
Westbound
Northbound
Southbound
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
LT
TH
RT
10.0%
191
0
122
0
0
0
0
313
253
434
488
0
0.92
10.0%
0
0
0
212
1
386
112
388
0
0
715
283
AW
0.92
10.0%
217
14
5
3
5
197
1
154
4
164
235
100
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
TW
0.92
10.0%
0
40
3
83
32
0
3
0
94
113
0
0
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
TW
0.92
10.0%
0
0
9
609
4
118
9
589
362
71
683
0
S: Signalized intersection, TW: two way stop controlled intersection, AW: all way controlled intersection Assuming Peak Hour %HV=10%
2020 Forecasting Traffic Volumes on I-90 Mainline and Ramps AM Peak Hour Location
Type
2020 Base Condition
2020 Alternative 2
2020 Alternative 3A
PM Peak Hour 2020 Alternative 3B
2020 Base Condition
2020 Alternative 2
2020 Alternative 3A
2020 Alternative 3B
I-90, WB I-90 WB offramp to SR 904 I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 WB onramp from SR 902 I-90 WB Under SR 902 I-90 WB offramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
Mainline
1400
1400
1400
1400
1951
1951
1951
1951
SR 904 Off Ramp
604
604
604
604
810
810
810
810
Mainline
1400
1400
1400
1400
1951
1951
1951
1951
Mainline
1220
1220
1216
1216
1697
1697
1693
1693
SR 902 On Ramp
180
180
184
184
286
286
290
290
Mainline
1220
1220
1216
1216
1697
1697
1693
1693
Mainline
1676
1676
1676
1676
2246
2246
2246
2246
SR 902 Off Ramp
456
456
460
460
548
548
552
552
Mainline
1676
1676
1676
1676
2246
2246
2246
2246
I-90, EB I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 EB offramp to SR 902 I-90 EB, Under SR 902 I-90 EB onramp from SR 902 I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Mainline
1706
1706
1706
1706
1366
1366
1366
1366
Mainline
1706
1706
1706
1706
1366
1366
1366
1366
SR 902 Off Ramp
233
237
237
237
251
255
255
255
Mainline
1473
1469
1469
1469
1115
1111
1111
1111
Mainline
1473
1469
1469
1469
1115
1111
1111
1111
SR 902 On Ramp
535
535
535
535
599
599
599
599
Mainline
2008
2008
2008
2008
1715
1715
1715
1715
2040 Forecasting Traffic Volumes on I-90 Mainline and Ramps AM Peak Hour Location
2040 Base Condition
2040 Alternative 2
Mainline
1566
1566
SR 904 Off Ramp
705
Mainline
2040 Alternative 3A
PM Peak Hour 2040 Alternative 3B
2040 Base Condition
2040 Alternative 2
2040 Alternative 3A
2040 Alternative 3B
1566
1566
2314
2314
2314
2314
705
705
705
996
996
996
996
1566
1566
1566
1566
2314
2314
2314
2314
Mainline
1359
1359
1355
1355
1940
1940
1936
1936
SR 902 On Ramp
208
208
212
212
404
404
408
408
Mainline
1359
1359
1355
1355
1940
1940
1936
1936
Mainline
2028
2028
2028
2028
2526
2526
2526
2526
SR 902 Off Ramp
669
669
673
673
585
585
589
589
Mainline
2028
2028
2028
2028
2526
2526
2526
2526
Type
I-90, WB I-90 WB offramp to SR 904 I-90 WB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 WB onramp from SR 902 I-90 WB Under SR 902 I-90 WB offramp to SR 902 I-90 WB, East of SR 902
I-90, EB I-90 EB, between SR 902 and SR 904 I-90 EB offramp to SR 902 I-90 EB, Under SR 902 I-90 EB onramp from SR 902 I-90 EB, East of SR 902
Mainline
2094
1706
1706
1706
1592
1592
1592
1592
Mainline
2094
1706
1706
1706
1592
1592
1592
1592
SR 902 Off Ramp
378
382
382
382
300
304
304
304
Mainline
1716
1712
1712
1712
1291
1287
1287
1287
Mainline
1716
1712
1712
1712
1291
1287
1287
1287
SR 902 On Ramp
563
535
535
535
764
764
764
764
Mainline
2279
2008
2008
2008
2056
2056
2056
2056
2020 Forecasting Traffic Turning Movements at Intersections AM Peak Hour Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90
WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
Control
Two Way
Two Way
All Way
2020 Alternative 2
2020 Alternative 3B
2020 Base Condition
2020 Alternative 2
2020 Alternative 3A
2020 Alternative 3B
1,456
1,461
1,461
1,461
1,668
1,673
1,673
1,673
152
152
152
152
137
137
137
137
EB-T
3
7
7
7
0
4
4
4
EB-R
88
88
88
88
113
113
113
113
2020 Base Condition
Overall EB-L
NB-T
239
239
239
239
266
266
266
266
NB-R
230
230
230
230
331
331
331
331
SB-L
307
307
307
307
348
348
348
348
SB-T
437
438
438
438
473
474
474
474
Overall
1,484
1,484
1,488
1,484
1,766
1,766
1,770
1,766 240
WB-L
280
281
281
281
239
240
240
WB-T
1
1
5
1
1
1
5
1
WB-R
247
246
246
246
322
321
321
321
NB-L
86
86
86
86
93
93
93
93
NB-T
310
310
310
310
327
327
327
327 588
SB-T
468
468
468
468
588
588
588
SB-R
92
92
92
92
196
196
196
196
Overall
841
843
843
843
1,020
1,022
1,022
1,022
EB-L
83
83
83
83
211
211
211
211
EB-T
5
5
5
5
11
11
11
11
EB-R
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
5
WB-L
5
5
5
5
3
3
3
3
WB-T
13
13
13
13
5
5
5
5
WB-R
122
122
122
122
174
174
174
174
NB-L
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
NB-T
187
187
187
187
130
130
130
130
NB-R
6
6
6
6
4
4
4
4
SB-L
150
150
150
150
182
182
182
182
SB-T
85
85
85
85
203
203
203
203
SB-R
183 290
185 292
185 292
185 292
91 340
93 342
93 342
93 342
Overall
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Two Way
Two Way
PM Peak Hour
2020 Alternative 3A
Movement
EB-L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
EB-T EB-R
30
30
30
30
35
35
35
35
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
WB-L
76
76
76
76
82
82
82
82 24
WB-T
17
17
17
17
24
24
24
WB-R
110
112
112
112
0
2
2
2
NB-L
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
NB-T
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NB-R
55
55
55
55
83
83
83
83
SB-L
0
0
0
0
110
110
110
110
SB-T
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SB-R
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Overall
1,629
1,629
1,629
1,629
2,090
2,090
2,090
2,090
EB-L
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
EB-T EB-R
3
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
11
11
11
11
9
9
9
9
WB-L
211
211
211
211
488
488
488
488
WB-T
0
0
0
0
4
4
4
4
WB-R
31
31
31
31
101
101
101
101
NB-L
0
0
0
0
9
9
9
9
NB-T
475
475
475
475
517
517
517
517
NB-R
358
358
358
358
294
294
294
294
SB-L
90
90
90
90
91
91
91
91
SB-T
449
449
449
449
577
577
577
577
SB-R
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2040 Forecasting Traffic Turning Movements at Intersections AM Peak Hour Intersection
EB Ramp @ SR902 / I-90
WB Ramp @ SR 902 / I-90
Aero Rd @ Westbow Blvd
Control
Two Way
Two Way
All Way
2040 Alternative 2
2040 Alternative 3B
2040 Base Condition
2040 Alternative 2
2040 Alternative 3A
2040 Alternative 3B
1,708
1,713
1,713
1,713
1,801
1,806
1,806
1,806
239
239
239
239
191
191
191
191
EB-T
3
7
7
7
0
4
4
4
EB-R
137
137
137
137
122
122
122
122
2040 Base Condition
Overall EB-L
NB-T
294
294
294
294
313
313
313
313
NB-R
195
195
195
195
253
253
253
253
SB-L
354
354
354
354
434
434
434
434
SB-T
486
487
487
487
488
489
489
489
Overall
1,853
1,853
1,857
1,853
2,097
2,097
2,101
2,097 213
WB-L
287
288
288
288
212
213
213
WB-T
1
1
5
1
1
1
5
1
WB-R
342
341
341
341
386
385
385
385
NB-L
83
83
83
83
112
112
112
112
NB-T
454
454
454
454
388
388
388
388
SB-T
558
558
558
558
715
715
715
715
SB-R
128
128
128
128
283
283
283
283
Overall
966
968
968
968
1,099
1,101
1,101
1,101
EB-L
86
86
86
86
217
217
217
217
EB-T
5
5
5
5
14
14
14
14
EB-R
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
5
WB-L
5
5
5
5
3
3
3
3
WB-T
13
13
13
13
5
5
5
5
WB-R
136
136
136
136
197
197
197
197
NB-L
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
NB-T
199
199
199
199
154
154
154
154
NB-R
6
6
6
6
4
4
4
4
SB-L
200
200
200
200
164
164
164
164
SB-T
116
116
116
116
235
235
235
235
SB-R
198 309
200 311
200 311
200 311
100 368
102 370
102 370
102 370
Overall
Westbow Blvd @ Hayford Rd
Hayford Rd @ Medical Lake Rd
Two Way
Two Way
PM Peak Hour
2040 Alternative 3A
Movement
EB-L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
EB-T EB-R
31
31
31
31
40
40
40
40
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
WB-L
85
85
85
85
83
83
83
83 32
WB-T
19
19
19
19
32
32
32
WB-R
113
115
115
115
0
2
2
2
NB-L
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
NB-T
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NB-R
59
59
59
59
94
94
94
94
SB-L
0
0
0
0
113
113
113
113
SB-T
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SB-R
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Overall
1,991
1,991
1,991
1,991
2,454
2,454
2,454
2,454 0
EB-L
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
EB-T EB-R
3
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
11
11
11
11
9
9
9
9 609
WB-L
265
265
265
265
609
609
609
WB-T
0
0
0
0
4
4
4
4
WB-R
46
46
46
46
118
118
118
118
NB-L
0
0
0
0
9
9
9
9
NB-T
599
599
599
599
589
589
589
589
NB-R
473
473
473
473
362
362
362
362
SB-L
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
SB-T
522
522
522
522
683
683
683
683
SB-R
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Appendix Policy Point 4 - A
Memorandum To:
Don Skillingstad
From:
Steve Lewis/Mark Burrus
CC:
File
Subject:
Alternatives Review & Selection - UPDATED
Date:
January 12, 2015
This memo was updated to reflect the results of the January 8, 2015 Technical Committee Meeting. To recap: Alternative 1 is what we are referring to as the “no build” option for the IJR. It includes the park & ride lot, but no modifications to the Interstate System for high capacity transit. Alternative 2 includes a west bound center median flyer stop and an east bound off ramp transit stop, as well as the park & ride lot from the “no build” option. Alternative 3A replaces the west bound center median flyer stop with a west bound on-ramp transit stop. Alternative 3B replaces the west bound center median flyer stop with a west bound shoulder flyer stop. Each of the four alternatives are shown below for reference.
Alternative 1
Alternative 2 1
Alternative 3B
Alternative 3A
Each of the Measures of Effectiveness was reviewed with the Technical Committee at the November 6th meeting (as well as with the Core Stakeholder Group later in the day) and to which STA has added one additional measure, System Operating Cost. The Measures of Effectiveness are further described below, and now include in total: •
Travel Time
•
Compatibility with Local Plans
•
Safety
•
Operations & Maintenance Cost
•
Pedestrian Travel Distance
•
System Operations Cost
•
Deviations
•
Construction Cost
•
Environmental Impacts
Alternatives Scoring Process Prior to the Technical Committee Meeting, STA and Lochner evaluated and ranked the alternatives based on STA’s goal of expanding connectivity to the West Plains communities and improving travel times to and from Cheney and Eastern Washington University by providing improved high quality, higher performance and cost-effective transit services. The results of the ranking by this method are shown in Method 1 of the attached matrix. During the Technical Committee Meeting, the team discussed other ways to rank the alternatives that might be more impartial. The first method proposed was a tiered system. In this way, the measures were not ranked individually, but instead fall into three distinct tiers. The results of the ranking by this method are shown in Method 2 of the attached matrix. A third method was suggested by Barb De Ste Croix, WSDOT HQ. This method, it was agreed by the team was the most impartial. Using this method, the team first ranked the measures of effectiveness by comparing each measure to the others to determine which was more important. The results provided the weighting to be used in the actual scoring analysis. The team then worked through the scoring analysis to 2
rank the alternatives. The results of the ranking by this method are shown in Method 3 of the attached matrix. Results All 3 scoring methods yielded similar results as shown in the attached matrix. Alternative 3B scored the lowest with the No Build and Alternative 3A scoring similarly, and Alternative 2 scoring the highest. Based on the results of this analysis Alternative 2 has been selected as the preferred alternative and will move forward in conceptual design.
3
West Plains Transit Center Measures of Effectiveness
Travel Time The measure of effectiveness from travel time is taken from Policy Point 3, Table 3.8: 2020 and 2040 Transit Travel time (in minutes). The values shown in the table were converted to seconds and summed to obtain one set of values for each direction of travel along I-90. The travel times evaluated do not include the future WSDOT roundabouts project.
Location
Type
Without WSDOT Roundabouts
AM PM
Without WSDOT Roundabouts
AM PM
No Build I-90, WB 2451 2709 I-90, EB 3254 3958
Total
12372 1
2020+2040 Alternative Alternative 2 3A
Alternative 3B
772 794
1629 1826
772 794
2602 3241
2602 3241
2602 3241
7409
9298
7409
4
3
4
Delta 4963
Best (4)
7400
8641
Increment 1241
Good (3)
8642
9883
Neutral (2)
9884
11124
Poor (1)
11125
12366
4
Safety The collision analysis, as summarized in Policy Point 3, indicates that the build alternatives have minor impact on the safety of the freeway and the adjacent local street system in the study area, as compared to base conditions in 2040. This is because the build alternatives involve only a few express buses accessing the West Plains Transit Center during the peak hours. Policy Point 3, Table 3.19: 2020 and 2040 ISATe Collision Analysis for Build Alternatives indicates that there is no change in the number of collisions between the base condition and the build alternatives; therefore all alternatives are scored equally as shown below.
Alternative Score
No Build 1 2
Delta 0 Increment 10
5
Center 2 2
On Ramp 3A 2
Shoulder of WB 3B 2
Best (4)
5.0
15.0
Good (3)
16.0
26.0
Neutral (2)
27.0
37.0
Poor (1)
38.0
48.0
Pedestrian Travel Distance The Pedestrian Travel Distance Measure of Effectiveness is based on the distance a pedestrian must travel from the time they enter the pedestrian bridge until they reach the pedestrian platform at the flyer stop for each of the build alternatives. The pedestrian bridge configuration is that used in the concept drawing and as shown in the alternatives presented in Policy Point 2.
Alternative Pedestrian Travel Distance (ft) Score
No Build 1 0 4
Delta 1214 Increment 304
6
Center 2 754 2
On Ramp 3A 1214 1
Shoulder of WB 3B 979 1
Best (4)
0
304
Good (3)
305
608
Neutral (2)
609
913
Poor (1)
914
1217
Deviations Needed to Implement Improvements This measure quantifies the number of deviations that are anticipated to be required for each of the alternatives. The analysis, based on conceptual level design using aerial photography, indicates two of the alternatives, 2 and 3B, may require deviations. Alternative 2 Alternative 2 may require a shoulder width deviation. Design standard for a non-separated HOV lane is 12 feet in a tangent with minimum combined shoulder width of 12 feet, giving a total roadway width of 24 feet. Separating the HOV lane from the general purpose lane would require barrier on the right side which adds an additional 2 feet of width plus 2 feet of shy distance on each side for a total of 30 feet. Measuring using aerial photography, there appears to be approximately 28 feet of available width between the center pier and the inside edge of shoulder. Per the as-built plans, Four Lakes to Geiger Field, the width available between the centerline of the pier and the edge of pavement is 34 feet. Subtracting half the 3 foot pier diameter, (1.5 feet) minus the barrier including 2 feet for deflection leaves 28.5 feet. Alternative 3B Using the as-built drawing from the Four Lakes to Geiger Field project, an analysis was done to evaluate the feasibility of constructing a transit only lane between the existing bridge pier and abutment on the north side of westbound I-90. The analysis showed the option is feasible, however a deviation will likely be required for shoulder width (horizontal clearance) as well as vertical clearance. Horizontal clearance required is 24 feet and there is 20 feet available. Vertical clearance, based on WSDOT Design Manual Exhibit 720-1, is >16 feet and there is 13.5 feet available. See Figure 1 below. Figure 1
Alternative Shoulder Width Vertical Clearance Total Score Legend:
No Build 1 0 0 0 4
Center 2 1 0 1 3
On Ramp 3A 0 0 0 4
Shoulder of WB 3B 1 1 2 2
Best (4)
Good (3)
Neutral (2)
Poor (1)
7
Environmental Impacts This measure looks at impacts to sensitive areas, such as wetlands and streams. No environmental field work has been completed at this stage in the IJR process, however historical data obtained for the interchange area has identified wetlands along the eastbound off-ramp, and adjacent to the east bound on-ramp and the west bound offramp. The area of impacts to these previously identified wetlands was estimated and scored as shown below. Wetland impacts along the eastbound off-ramp are the same for all alternatives. Should additional environmental impacts be identified as design progresses, this measure will need to be reevaluated. No Build 1
Alternative Wetland A - EB off ramp Wetland B - EB on ramp Wetland C - WB off ramp
0 0 0 0.00 4
Total Score
Center On Ramp 2 3A Impact area in acres 0.23 0.23 0 0 0 0 0.23 0.23 4 4 Best (4) Good (3) Neutral (2) Poor (1)
Delta 0.34 Increment 0.09
8
0.23 0.33 0.42 0.52
Shoulder of WB 3B 0.23 0.34 0 0.57 1 0.32 0.41 0.51 0.60
Compatibility with Local Plans Policy Point 5 (draft) of the IJR discusses the compatibility of the alternatives with local plans including Connect Spokane, WSDOT’s I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvement Project, Horizon 2040 the Washington State Transportation Plan and the County. Of these, the I-90/SR 902 Interchange Improvement project has the most impact on future operations.
Alternative Horizon 2040 Connect Spokane WSDOT I-90/SR 902 IC WA State Trans. Plan Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Total Score
No Build
Center
On Ramp
1 0 0 1 1 1 3 2
2 1 1 1 1 1 5 4
3A 1 1 1 1 1 5 4
Delta 2 Increment 0.5
9
Shoulder of WB 3B 1 1 1 1 1 5 4
Best (4)
5.3
4.8
Good (3)
4.7
4.2
Neutral (2)
4.1
3.6
Poor (1)
3.5
3.0
Operations and Maintenance Cost Evaluating Operations and Maintenance (O&M) is based on two main criteria: area of new pavement and area of new (pedestrian) bridge to be maintained. For this alternative analysis, it was assumed that all other costs related to O&M would be relatively equivalent. Costs such as snow removal would be a function of new pavement and are not broken out separately.
Alternative Area of New Pavement (sf) Area of Ped Bridge (sf) Score
No Build 1 22959 0 17219 4
Center 2 99075
On Ramp 3A 118851
Shoulder of WB 3B 197973
7540 76191 3
12140 92173 2
9790 150927 1
Best (4)
17219
50646
Good (3)
50647
84074
Neutral (2)
84075
117502
Poor (1)
117503
150930
Weighted Average ((0.75xPavement) + (0.25xStructure))
Delta 133708 Increment 33427
10
Systems Operations Cost Systems operations cost impacts are based upon a number of factors including the cost per hour of service, annual service hours, vehicle purchase costs, vehicle maintenance costs, passenger impact and passenger delay. The relative costs for flyer stops vs no flyer stops was analyzed. If no flyer stops are constructed, the system will require additional vehicles and staff, an additional route, and result in additional passenger delay. The construction of flyer stops will not require additional systems costs.
Alternative System Impact Passenger Impact Score Legend:
No Build 1 1 1 1
Center 2 4 4 4
On Ramp 3A 4 3 3
Shoulder of WB 3B 4 4 4
Best (4)
Good (3)
Neutral (2)
Poor (1)
11
Construction Cost The project is early in the conceptual design phase so complete cost estimates have not yet been developed. To determine differences in costs between the build alternatives, quantities for the more costly elements were estimated. Using WSDOT’s Unit Bid Analysis tool, equal unit bid prices were determined and summed to develop order of magnitude costs.
Alternative Pedestrian Bridge Structure Area (sf) Pedestrian Platform (sf) Area of New Pavement (sf) HMA (tons) Stem Wall (sf) Raised Median (LS) Total
Unit Cost
1_ No Build Quantity Price
2_Center Quantity Price
3A_On Ramp Quantity Price
3B_Shldr of WB Quantity Price
$
300
0
$
-
7540
$ 2,262,000
12140
$ 3,642,000
9790
$ 2,937,000
$
150
0
$
-
1108
$
166,200
1108
$
166,200
1108
$
166,200
0
$
-
99075
$
-
118851
$
-
197973
$
-
90 75
0 0
$ $
-
7376 0
$ $
663,803 -
8848 0
$ $
796,302 -
14738 1110
$ 1,326,419 $ 83,250
$370,000
0
$
-
1
$
370,000
0
$
-
$ 4
-
$ $
$ 3,462,003
$ 4,610,000 $ 1,200,000
Good (3)
12
1 Best Good Neutral Poor
Neutral (2)
-
$ 4,512,869
1
Best (4)
$
$ 4,604,502
2
Delta Increment
Legend:
0
0 1,210,000 2,420,000 3,630,000
Poor (1)
1,200,000 2,410,000 3,620,000 4,830,000
Attachment METHOD 1 - STA/LOCHNER SCORING MEASURE
BASE SCALE
WEIGHTED SCALE
WEIGHT
NB
2
3A
3B
Travel Time
9
1
4
3
Safety
8
2
2
2
Pedestrian Travel Distance
7
4
2
Deviations
6
4
Environmental Impacts
5
Compatibility with Local Plans
4
Operations and Maintenance Cost Systems Operations Cost Construction Cost
NB
2
3A
3B
Ranking
Score
Alternative
4
9
36
27
36
2
123.0
No Build
2
16
16
16
16
1
139.0
ALT 2
1
1
28
14
7
7
2
123.0
ALT 3A
3
4
2
24
18
24
12
3
107.0
ALT 3B
4
4
4
1
20
20
20
5
2
4
4
4
8
16
16
16
3
4
3
2
2
12
9
6
6
2
1
4
3
4
2
8
6
8
1
4
2
1
1
4
2
1
1
TOTAL
26
28
24
21
123
139
123
107
METHOD 2 - TIERED SCORING MEASURE
BASE SCALE
WEIGHTED SCALE
WEIGHT
NB
2
3A
3B
NB
2
3A
3B
Ranking
Score
Alternative
Travel Time
9
1
4
3
4
9
36
27
36
2
122.0
No Build
Safety
9
2
2
2
2
18
18
18
18
1
136.0
ALT 2
Pedestrian Travel Distance
9
4
2
1
1
36
18
9
9
3
120.0
ALT 3A
Deviations
5
4
3
4
2
20
15
20
10
4
105.0
ALT 3B
Environmental Impacts
5
4
4
4
1
20
20
20
5
Compatibility with Local Plans
5
2
4
4
4
10
20
20
20
Operations and Maintenance Cost
1
4
3
2
2
4
3
2
2
Systems Operations Cost
1
1
4
3
4
1
4
3
4
Construction Cost
1
4
2
1
1
4
2
1
1
TOTAL
26
28
24
21
122
136
120
105
METHOD 3 - TECHNICAL COMMITTEE SCORING
Deviations
Environmental Impacts
Compatibility with Local Plans
Operations and Maintenance Cost
Systems Operations Cost
Construction Cost
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
x
b
a
a
a
a
a
a/h
a
7.5
17%
x
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
9
20%
ALT 2
4
2
2
3
4
4
3
x
c/d
c/e
c
g
h
c/i
3.5
8%
ALT 3A
3
2
1
4
4
4
2
x
e
d/f
g
h
i
2
4%
ALT 3B
4
2
1
2
1
4
1
4
x
e
e/g
e
e
6
13%
x
g
h
i
1.5
3%
Ranking
Score
Alternative
x
h
i
4.5
10%
2
117.0
No Build
x
h
6.5
14%
1
139.5
ALT 2
x
4.5
10%
3
115.0
ALT 3A
45
100%
4
102.5
ALT 3B
13
Pedestrian Travel Distance
b
No Build
Safety
a
Alternative
Travel Time
Percentage of Total
TOTAL
TOTAL
i Construction Cost
Construction Cost
h Systems Operations Cost
Systems Operations Cost
Operations and Maintenance g Cost
Operations and Maintenance Cost
f Compatibility with Local Plans
Compatibility with Local Plans
e Environmental Impacts
Environmental Impacts
d Deviations
Deviations
c Pedestrian Travel Distance
Pedestrian Travel Distance
b Safety
Safety
a Travel Time
SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES (4=Best, 3=Good, 2=Neutral, 1=Poor)
Travel Time
MEASURE
CRITERIA WEIGHTING
7.5
9
3.5
2
6
1.5
4.5
6.5
4.5
1
2
4
4
4
2
4
1
4
117
4
2
139.5
3
1
115
1
102.5
SCORE
Appendix Policy Point 4 - B
Appendix PP4-B LEGEND IMPROVEMENTS
M ATCH LI NE SHEET 2
PROPERTY / ROW LINES
1/29/2015
0 WB 9 I
B 0E 9 I
E L 5 MI . 0
EX I T
272
I : \BLV\PRJ\000009715\8_ Desi gn\W orki ng\rhoward\9715- Exhi bi t- Al t_ 2. dgn
EX I T 902
272
W ES T 902
M edical Lake 1/2 MILE
W ES T
M edical Lake
West Plains Transit Center
50
CONCEPTUAL NO.
DATE
BY
APPR.
0
50
100
SCALE IN FEET
REVISIONS
DRAWING NUMBER DESIGNED BY
DATE
DRAWN BY
DATE
CHECKED BY
DATE
WEST PLAINS TRANSIT
SN01
ALTERNATIVE 2 APPROVED BY
FILENAME:
DATE
Z-tblk.dwg
SHT
OF
00
LEGEND IMPROVEMENTS
PROPERTY / ROW LINES
MATCH LI NE SHEET 3
I 9 0E B
SR 902
MATCH LI NE SHEET 1
1/29/2015
I 9 0 WB
SH EE T
4
ONL Y
BUS
I : \BLV\PRJ\000009715\8_ Desi gn\W orki ng\rhoward\9715- Exhi bi t- Al t_ 2. dgn
35
ONLY
272 AT CH
BUSES
M
EX I T
LI NE
EXI T
M PH
50
CONCEPTUAL NO.
DATE
BY
APPR.
0
50
100
SCALE IN FEET
REVISIONS
DRAWING NUMBER DESIGNED BY
DATE
DRAWN BY
DATE
CHECKED BY
DATE
APPROVED BY
DATE
FILENAME:
Z-tblk.dwg
WEST PLAINS TRANSIT ALTERNATIVE 2
SN02 SHT
OF
00
LEGEND IMPROVEMENTS
PROPERTY / ROW LINES
EX I T
902
272
W ES T
M edical Lake
EX I T
902
272
W ES T
M edical Lake 1/2 MILE
BUS
ONL Y
MATCH LI NE SHEET 2
1/29/2015
West Plains Transit Center
I 9 0W B
EXI T
0 . 5M I L E
25 M PH
I 9 0E B
I : \BLV\PRJ\000009715\8_ Desi gn\W orki ng\rhoward\9715- Exhi bi t- Al t_ 2. dgn
RESTRICTED
EXIT BUSES ONLY
BUSES ONLY
50
CONCEPTUAL NO.
DATE
BY
APPR.
0
50
100
SCALE IN FEET
REVISIONS
DRAWING NUMBER DESIGNED BY
DATE
DRAWN BY
DATE
CHECKED BY
DATE
WEST PLAINS TRANSIT APPROVED BY
FILENAME:
SN03
ALTERNATIVE 2
DATE
Z-tblk.dwg
SHT
OF
00
H TC MA
NE I L
T EE SH
LEGEND 2 IMPROVEMENTS
PROPERTY / ROW LINES
TRANSIT CENTER LAYOUT PROVIDED FOR INFORMATION ONLY AND IS NOT PART OF THE IJR
W
A E R O
R D
I : \BLV\PRJ\000009715\8_ Desi gn\W orki ng\rhoward\9715- Exhi bi t- Al t_ 2. dgn
W ESTBOW
BLVD
1/29/2015
HA Y F ORD RD
50
CONCEPTUAL NO.
DATE
BY
APPR.
0
50
100
SCALE IN FEET
REVISIONS
DRAWING NUMBER DESIGNED BY
DATE
DRAWN BY
DATE
CHECKED BY
DATE
WEST PLAINS TRANSIT APPROVED BY
FILENAME:
SN04
ALTERNATIVE 2
DATE
Z-tblk.dwg
SHT
OF
00
